Mi'gmaq Wiki - User contributions [en-ca]

Main Page

2015-10-28T01:48:17Z

Carol: /* Verbs */

Welcome to the Mi'gmaq language wiki!

This wiki aims to provide a snapshot of some of the current topics in describing the grammar of Mi'gmaq that McGill linguists are working on with members of the Listuguj community. It is still a work in progress, so nothing here should be taken as the final word on the language, although we are doing our best to make it as accurate as possible. If you see an error, we are very happy to fix it, so please contact us through the [http://migmaq.org blog] or if you have an account feel free to fix it yourself! If you know something about Mi'gmaq and would like to contribute to the wiki, feel free to also contact us for an account. Please be aware that anything that is submitted to the wiki may be edited by other contributors.

A list of glosses used on this wiki can be found on the [[Glosses]] page. There are various resources online which provide definitions of basic linguistic terminology, for example this [http://www.sil.org/linguistics/GlossaryOflinguisticTerms/ glossary of linguistic terms]; see the "Linguistics Online" sidebar of the [http://migmaq.org blog] for more info.

Many of the articles in this wiki build on class projects that were developed as part of a class wiki for a field methods course on Mi'gmaq in Fall 2011 at McGill. Currently available and projected content of the wiki is described below, for a structured list of these articles visit the [[contents]] page.

==Background information==
Mi'gmaq is an Eastern Algonquian language spoken in eastern Canada. For more information about the history and the people, see the article [[Background]]. There are several general characteristics of the language that are useful to understand for the remaining sections. These include:
* [[Person and number]]
* [[Animacy]]
* [[Obviation]]

==Sounds and spelling==
There are several different ways of writing down Mi'gmaq. This wiki uses the [[Spelling]] from Listuguj, but some of the resources we discuss may also use other systems. One sound that is not always written is schwa, because it is sometimes possible to predict where to pronounce it anyway. For details on this, see [[Writing Schwa]].

Mi'gmaq has six [[Vowels|vowels]] and thirteen [[Consonants|consonants]] according to the Listuguj orthography, although they are not always pronounced as in [[Pronunciation Differences|English]]. Mi'gmaq words are also grouped into [[Syllables|syllables]], some of which are pronounced more emphatically, or are [[Stress|stressed]].

==Verbs==
''For more detail, see [[Verbs]]''

Verbs are used to describe actions, activities, or events. They are the central component of a sentence in Mi'gmaq and are made up of many different pieces of information. They contain enough information that they can represent a complete sentence, and are often the only element in a sentence.

All verbs include at least: the [[Stem|Verb Stem]] and [[Person and number]] marking. The person and number markings are vary depending on the type of verb, as described in the following articles.
* [[VAI]] -- Intransitive Animate Verbs
* [[VII]] -- Intransitive Inanimate Verbs
* [[VTA]] -- Transitive Animate Verbs
* [[VTI]] -- Transitive Inanimate Verbs
There are also elements that aren't present on all verbs but are still very useful in certain contexts, including [[Preverbs]], [[Negation]], [[Tense]], and [[Obviation]]. An additional characteristic of verbs is [[Mood]], which refers to the speaker's attitude towards a situation, for example, making a definite statement, giving an order, or talking about a condition or possibility. Also see the page on [[Evidentiality]], or the grammatical marking of information source.

==Nouns==
''For more detail, see [[Nouns]].

Nouns are words that refer to persons (like ''e'pit'', "woman"), places (like ''Listuguj''), or things (like ''mpoqon'', "bed"). They are the parts of a sentence that do the action described by the verb or have the action done to them. Many Mi'gmaq sentences have nouns in them, but they aren't necessary because the verbs are so expressive.

Nouns can have several characteristics in Mi'gmaq, including [[Animacy]], being [[Plural Nouns|Singular or Plural]], [[Obviation]], and being [[Absentative]]. Nouns can be modified by a variety of things, including [[Possession]], [[Adjectives]], [[Determiners]], [[Numerals]], [[Relative Clauses]], [[Nouns#Diminutive|Diminutives and Augmentatives]]. [[Pronouns]] can also be used to substitute for nouns.

==Sentences==
* [[Discourse Particles]]
* [[Questions]]
* [[Word Order]]

==[[Conversational Mi'gmaq]]==
In this section you will find useful everyday phrases to start off your Mi'gmaq learning!

==Understanding and Editing this Wiki==
* [[Glosses|List of Abbreviations]]
* [[Style Guide]]
* [[How to do Citations]]
* [[Wiki gloss extension]]

* Consult [http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Help:Contents User's Guide] for information on using the wiki software
* [http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Manual:FAQ MediaWiki FAQ]

==Mi'gmaq Language Resources==
* The [http://migmaq.org/ blog] associated with this wiki, for project updates and more language-related links
* [http://www.mikmaqonline.org/ Mikmaq Online], which includes an online dictionary

Main Page

2015-10-28T01:39:58Z

Carol: /* Verbs */

Welcome to the Mi'gmaq language wiki!

This wiki aims to provide a snapshot of some of the current topics in describing the grammar of Mi'gmaq that McGill linguists are working on with members of the Listuguj community. It is still a work in progress, so nothing here should be taken as the final word on the language, although we are doing our best to make it as accurate as possible. If you see an error, we are very happy to fix it, so please contact us through the [http://migmaq.org blog] or if you have an account feel free to fix it yourself! If you know something about Mi'gmaq and would like to contribute to the wiki, feel free to also contact us for an account. Please be aware that anything that is submitted to the wiki may be edited by other contributors.

A list of glosses used on this wiki can be found on the [[Glosses]] page. There are various resources online which provide definitions of basic linguistic terminology, for example this [http://www.sil.org/linguistics/GlossaryOflinguisticTerms/ glossary of linguistic terms]; see the "Linguistics Online" sidebar of the [http://migmaq.org blog] for more info.

Many of the articles in this wiki build on class projects that were developed as part of a class wiki for a field methods course on Mi'gmaq in Fall 2011 at McGill. Currently available and projected content of the wiki is described below, for a structured list of these articles visit the [[contents]] page.

==Background information==
Mi'gmaq is an Eastern Algonquian language spoken in eastern Canada. For more information about the history and the people, see the article [[Background]]. There are several general characteristics of the language that are useful to understand for the remaining sections. These include:
* [[Person and number]]
* [[Animacy]]
* [[Obviation]]

==Sounds and spelling==
There are several different ways of writing down Mi'gmaq. This wiki uses the [[Spelling]] from Listuguj, but some of the resources we discuss may also use other systems. One sound that is not always written is schwa, because it is sometimes possible to predict where to pronounce it anyway. For details on this, see [[Writing Schwa]].

Mi'gmaq has six [[Vowels|vowels]] and thirteen [[Consonants|consonants]] according to the Listuguj orthography, although they are not always pronounced as in [[Pronunciation Differences|English]]. Mi'gmaq words are also grouped into [[Syllables|syllables]], some of which are pronounced more emphatically, or are [[Stress|stressed]].

==Verbs==
''For more detail, see [[Verbs]]''

Verbs are used to describe actions, activities, or events. They are the central component of a sentence in Mi'gmaq and are made up of many different pieces of information. They contain enough information that they can represent a complete sentence, and are often the only element in a sentence.

All verbs include at least: the [[Stem|Verb Stem]] and [[Person and number]] marking. The person and number markings are vary depending on the type of verb, as described in the following articles.
* [[VAI]] -- Intransitive Animate Verbs
* [[VII]] -- Intransitive Inanimate Verbs
* [[VTA]] -- Transitive Animate Verbs
* [[VTI]] -- Transitive Inanimate Verbs
There are also elements that aren't present on all verbs but are still very useful in certain contexts, including [[Preverbs]], [[Negation]], [[Tense]], and [[Obviation]]. An additional characteristic of verbs is [[Mood]], which refers to the speaker's attitude towards a situation, for example, making a definite statement, giving an order, or talking about a condition or possibility. Also see [[Evidentiality]], referring to grammatical marking of information source.

==Nouns==
''For more detail, see [[Nouns]].

Nouns are words that refer to persons (like ''e'pit'', "woman"), places (like ''Listuguj''), or things (like ''mpoqon'', "bed"). They are the parts of a sentence that do the action described by the verb or have the action done to them. Many Mi'gmaq sentences have nouns in them, but they aren't necessary because the verbs are so expressive.

Nouns can have several characteristics in Mi'gmaq, including [[Animacy]], being [[Plural Nouns|Singular or Plural]], [[Obviation]], and being [[Absentative]]. Nouns can be modified by a variety of things, including [[Possession]], [[Adjectives]], [[Determiners]], [[Numerals]], [[Relative Clauses]], [[Nouns#Diminutive|Diminutives and Augmentatives]]. [[Pronouns]] can also be used to substitute for nouns.

==Sentences==
* [[Discourse Particles]]
* [[Questions]]
* [[Word Order]]

==[[Conversational Mi'gmaq]]==
In this section you will find useful everyday phrases to start off your Mi'gmaq learning!

==Understanding and Editing this Wiki==
* [[Glosses|List of Abbreviations]]
* [[Style Guide]]
* [[How to do Citations]]
* [[Wiki gloss extension]]

* Consult [http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Help:Contents User's Guide] for information on using the wiki software
* [http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Manual:FAQ MediaWiki FAQ]

==Mi'gmaq Language Resources==
* The [http://migmaq.org/ blog] associated with this wiki, for project updates and more language-related links
* [http://www.mikmaqonline.org/ Mikmaq Online], which includes an online dictionary

Mood

2015-10-28T01:38:31Z

Carol: Blanked the page

Mood

2015-10-28T01:37:53Z

Carol: Created page with "Evidentiality is the grammatical marking of source of information (Aikhenvald 2004: 1). The Mi'gmaq evidential system consists of two clear evidentials---the direct and indirect...."

Evidentiality is the grammatical marking of source of information (Aikhenvald 2004: 1). The Mi'gmaq evidential system consists of two clear evidentials---the direct and indirect. The direct evidential marks for information acquired firsthand; the indirect marks for information acquired through means other than the firsthand. Note that it has been argued that Mi'gmaq, an Eastern Algonquian language, has three evidentiality markers---direct, indirect, and deferential evidential markers (Inglis, 2003). However, the so-called deferential evidential is only just an allomorph of the indirect evidential.

Negation

2014-08-19T13:36:07Z

Carol: /* Future Tense */

=Introduction=
Negation is the process of turning affirmative statements into the opposite form. For example, the negative equivalent of affirmative sentence, ''I am eating'' is ''I am not eating''. In English there are a few processes at work. ''not'' must always come with an auxiliary verb like the verb 'to have' and 'to be'. In Mi'gmaq, with its extremely detailed and expansive verb conjugations in the present, it is not surprising that the negated conjugation of verbs is just as detailed and expansive as they are in the affirmative.

To start off any commentary on negation, it seems fitting to start of with the word "no" which is ''moqwa'' in Mi'gmaq. (The opposite of this is ''e'e'' , meaning "yes".) Negation in Mi'gmaq is similar to that of Obijwe in that there is both an affix that occurs between the verb and the person marker and a word that comes before the verb denoting negation. See [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ojibwe_grammar#Verbs Verb Conjugation in Ojibwe]. The Mi'gmaq negated affix is ''w'' or ''u'' which is very closely related to the Proto-Algonquian form for negation which is is ''*-w'' ( [http://kuscholarworks.ku.edu/dspace/bitstream/1808/440/1/ling.wp.v15.n2.paper6.pdf Proulx, 1990] ). ''w'' or ''u'' are very closely related phonetically since ''w'' is the semivowel corresponding to the vowel ''u''. Bear in mind that during the elicitation sessions, sometimes it was unsure whether to use ''w'' or ''u''.

Negation in Mi'gmaq consists of adding ''mu'' or ''ma'' then the verb conjugated in the negated verb form. After ''mu'' or ''ma'' the verb must always contain a negative particle. We must think of these two things as inseparable. ''mu'' always comes before the negative conjugated verb in the present or past, and ''ma'' always comes before future or if the prefix ''gis'' ('can', 'to be able to') is attached to the verb. All other prefixes abide by the rules ''mu'' before present or past and ''ma'' before future. There are other particles that take the negated form of the verb, but it is obvious that these particles express a negated idea.

Please note as well that in some of the studies on Mi'gmaq and Algonquian languages the term 'nonaffirmative' is used to describe the negated form. For consistency in this report, I will use the term 'negated' to indicate the form of the verb which is the opposite of affirmative. 'Nonaffirmative' and 'negated' however refer to the same process of negation.

= Conjugation of the Negated Verb =
I have selected the verb ''mijji'' (to eat). Please note that some resources spell this like ''mijji'' where other spell it ''miji'' ([http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED136614.pdf Micmac Teaching Grammar, 1976]). I have selected the spelling from [http://www.mikmaqonline.org/servlet/dictionaryFrameSet.html?arg0=mijjit&method=searchFromMikmaq the Migmaq talking dictionary]. It is also important to note that the Micmac Teaching Grammar uses an orthography that is different of all other orthographies used with Mi'gmaq. I will indicate which terms they are and give the Listuguj equivalent orthographical manner of writing them.

The simplified formula for the conjugation in the negated form: the base form + ''u'' or ''w'' + person ending ([http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED136614.pdf Micmac Teaching Grammar, 1976])
The base form for intransitive verbs is always the verb in the first person singular. For example I eat is ''mijji''. Now to create the second person singular we add the ending -''n'' denoting second person singular and get the form ''mijjin''. For another type of verb (henceforth referred to as the ''a'' verbs) we take the base form ''amalga-'' and add -''n'' to get ''amalgan'' (you dance) and to get the first person singular we add -''i''. Please note that it has been hypothesized that there are at least eleven different conjugations. We will only be dealing with a couple here. Because of reasons of time limitation, I was not able to elicit all eleven types but when there is a difference in conjugation, that will be noted. Note that in the plural the ''u'' or ''w'' comes after ''-ulti-''. This could be due the the fact that ''-ulti-'' is the plural affix that attaches to the base form of the verb and does not convey anything about the tense of the verb, rather it is used to denote that the verb is plural. Thus the ''u'' or ''w'' comes right before the tense marker which is always at the end of the verb. For the first person singular in present there is a null tense marker at the end of some verbs (for example the ''-i'' verbs) thus the negative marker is at the end.

== Present Tense ==
First is a comparison of the affirmative and negated paradigms of the verb ''mijji'' ('eat').

{| class="wikitable"
|+ mijji- 'eat'
|-
! scope="col" colspan="2"| ↓person / number→
! scope="col" | SG
! scope="col" | DU
! scope="col" | PL
|-
! scope="row" rowspan="2"| 1
! scope="row"| 13
| rowspan="2" | mijji
|mijjieg
|mijjultieg
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| mijji'gw
| mijjulti'gw
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2" | 2
| mijjin
| mijjioq
| mijjultioq
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2"| 3
| mijjit
| mijjijig
| mijjultijig
|-
|}

{| class="wikitable"
|+ mu mijji- 'not eat'
|-
! scope="col" colspan="2"| ↓person / number→
! scope="col" | SG
! scope="col" | DU
! scope="col" | PL
|-
! scope="row" rowspan="2"| 1
! scope="row"| 13
| rowspan="2" | mu mijjiw
| mu mijjiweg
| mu mijjultiweg
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| mu mijjigw
| mu mijjultigw
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2" | 2
| mu mijjiun
| mu mijjiwoq
| mu mijjultiwoq
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2"| 3
| mu mijjigw
| mu mijji'gw
| mu mijjulti'gw
|-
|}

The word ''mu'' signifies negation. When ''mu'' is in front of the verb, the verb must also be conjugated in the negative form. In the above table we see the intrusion of the sound ''u'', ''ew'' or ''w''. The following table illustrates the endings for the present negative tense, keeping in mind ''mu'' must ALWAYS come right before the negated verb. When ''mu'' precedes a verb it must ALWAYS be in the negated form.

Below is a table that summarizes the VAI -i stem negative person endings in present conjugation. Inanimate [IN] conjugation was taken from the Micmac Grammar (1976, pg 155).

{| class="wikitable"
|+ VAI -i stem negative present person endings
|-
! scope="col" colspan="2"| ↓person / number→
! scope="col" | SG
! scope="col" | DU
! scope="col" | PL
|-
! scope="row" rowspan="2"| 1
! scope="row"| 13
| rowspan="2" |-u
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2" | 2
| -
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2"| 3.AN
| -
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2"| 3.IN
| -
| -
| -
|-
|}

The forms for the first person dual and plural in the exclusive and inclusive forms are the same. As shown by other data, the dual form seems to be in the process of disappearing. This is one such example where the dual form does not exist for the plural first person. Some younger speakers do not use the dual form at all so it is not surprising that we find a gap in the dual form here. All this is according to the speaker but if we followed the pattern of the previous forms we would expect the dual form for the inclusive and exclusive first person to be ''-ieweg''. "When the verb is negated, then the -g third person is ALWAYS found" (Micmac Grammar, 1976 pg 93).

Below is a comparison of different verbs to give an idea of how to conjugate different types of verbs in the negated form. All forms are conjugated in the present singular third person animate. The form of -''elie-'' was taken from Micmac Grammar (pg 155). For more detail about these forms see [[VAI]].

{| class="wikitable"
! VAI stem || Base Form || Gloss || Affirmative || Gloss || Negated || Gloss
|-
| -i
| mijji-
| eat
| mijjit
| s/he eats
| mu mijjigw
| s/he does not eat
|-
| -a
| amalga-
| dance
| amalgat
| s/he dances
| mu amalgagw
| s/he does not dance
|-
| -a'si
| ala'si-
| go around
| ala'sit
| s/he goes around
| mu ala'sigw
| s/he does not go around
|-
| -e
| elie-
| go
| eliet
| s/he goes
| mu eliegw
| s/he does not go
|-
|}

For verb conjugations in the affirmative please see [http://firstnationhelp.com/ali/posters/pdf/verb_conjugation.pdf Mi'kmaq Verb Conjugation]. As you can see, this site uses the verb ''mijisi'' meaning 'to eat'. In Listuguj this is not used as the word for to eat because it sounds too close for the verb ''mejisi'' 'to excrete'.

=== Transitive ===
Below is the conjugation in present of a transitive verb that takes an inanimate object.

{| class="wikitable" style="text-align:center"
|+ VTI Conjugation Class 1: -m class
|-
! scope="col" | ↓subject / object→
! scope="col" | 0SG
! scope="col" | 0PL
|-
! scope="row" | 1
| malqutm
| malqutmann
|-
! scope="row" | 13
| malqutmeg
| malqutmegl
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| malqutmu'g
| malqutmu'gul
|-
! scope="row" | 2
| malqutmn
| malqutmnn
|-
! scope="row" | 2PL
| malqutmoq
| malqutmoqol
|-
! scope="row" | 3
| malqutmeg
| malqutmegl
|-
! scope="row" | 3PL
| malqutmi'tij
| malqutmi'titl
|}

{| class="wikitable" style="text-align:center"
|+ VTI Negative Conjugation Class 1: -m class
|-
! scope="col" | ↓subject / object→
! scope="col" | 0SG
! scope="col" | 0PL
|-
! scope="row" | 1
| mu malqutmu
| mu malqutmuann
|-
! scope="row" | 13
| mu malqutmueg
| mu malqutmuegl
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| mu malqutmugg
| mu malqutmuggul
|-
! scope="row" | 2
| mu malqutmu'n
| mu malqutmu'nn
|-
! scope="row" | 2PL
| mu malqutmuoq
| mu malqutmuoqol
|-
! scope="row" | 3
| mu malqutmug
| mu malqutmugul
|-
! scope="row" | 3PL
| mu malqutmi'tigw
| mu malqutmi'tigul
|-
|}

{| class="wikitable" style="text-align:center"
|+ VTI Negative Conjugation Class 1: -m class
|-
! scope="col" | ↓subject / object→
! scope="col" | 0SG
! scope="col" | 0PL
|-
! scope="row" | 1
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 13
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 12
|
|
|-
! scope="row" | 2
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 2PL
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 3
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 3PL
| -
| -
|-
|}

== Imperative ==
Here is the formation of the affirmative imperative:
{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijji-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 2 Second person
| mijji
| mijjigw
| mijjultigw
|-
|}

Now we compare it to the negated:
{| class="wikitable"
! ''mutt mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 2 Second person
| mutt mijjiw
| mutt mijjinew
| mutt mijjultinew
|-
|}

== Past Tense ==
Again for the past we compare the past and the negated past.

{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| mijjiap
| mijjieg'p
| mijjultieg'p
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| mijji'gup
| mijjulti'gup
|-
| 2 Second person
| mijjit'p
| mijjioqop
| mijjultioqop
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| mijjip
| mijjipnig
| mijjultipnig
|}

Now let us look at the negated forms.

{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| mu mijjiwap
| mu mijjiweg'p
| mu mijjultiweg'p
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| mu mijjiwgup
| mu mijjultiwgup/mijjultiggup
|-
| 2 Second person
| mu mijjiwt'p
| mu mijjiwoqop
| mu mijjultiwoqop
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| mu mijjigup
| mu mijjigupnig
| mu mijjultigupnig
|}

Thus this would be the conjugation of the negated form:

{| class="wikitable"
! Negated Past||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| -
| -
| -
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| -
| -
|-
| 2 Second person
| -
| -
| -
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| -
|
|
|}

For the third person the -''ug'p'' can change to -''weg'p'' for example:

<gl>
\gll Mu ala'ti-we-g'p
not go-NEG-SG.PAST
\trans She didn't go
</gl>

== Future Tense ==
Affirmative:

{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| mijjit's/mijjia's(List)
| mijjitesnen
| mijjultitesnen
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| mijjitesnu
| mijjultitesnu
|-
| 2 Second person
| mijjit'sg
| mijjitoqs'p
| mijjultitoqs'p
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| mijjitew
| mijjitaq
| mijjultitaq
|}

Negated:

{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| ma' mijjiw
| ma' mijjiweg
| ma' mijjultiweg
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| ma' mijjigw
| ma' mijjultigw
|-
| 2 Second person
| ma' mijjiun
| ma' mijjiwoq
| ma' mijjultiwoq
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| ma' mijjigw
| ma' mijji'gw
| ma' mijjulti'gw
|}
NOTE: In the future the ''mu'' changes to ''ma' '' !! Like ''mu'', ''ma'' must always come before the verb conjugated in the negative future.

Paradigm of the negated endings in the future.

{| class="wikitable"
! Negated Future||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| -
| -
| -
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
|
| -
| -
|-
| 2 Second person
| -
|
|
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
|
|
|
|}

As you may have noticed the future tense is easy! The verbs take the same endings as the negated present tense but the ''mu'' is replaced with ''ma'' thus indicating future.

== When negation is used ==

When the verb is negated there must always find a negative particle (like ''mu'' or ''ma''). If not the sentence is ungrammatical as shown below:

<gl>
\gll *gis-wissugwatige-w
can-cook.1-NEG
\trans I cannot cook (intended meaning)
</gl>

The only form of the above sentence must be:

<gl>
\gll ma' gis-wissugwatige-w
NEG can-cook.1-NEG
\trans I cannot cook at this time
</gl>

<gl>
\gll mu gis-wissugwatige-w
can-cook.1-NEG
\trans I am unable to cook (something is preventing me from cooking)
</gl>

Thus it is seen that ''ma' '' comes before the verb, now making the sentence grammatical.

''ma' '' always precedes the future tense AND when the ''gis'' prefix is attached to the verb conjugated in the present for example:

<gl>
\gll ma' gis-amalga-w-g
NEG can-dance-NEG-3
\trans s/he cannot dance
</gl>

There are some expressions that always take the negative form of the verb such as ''me menga'' (not yet) and ''mowen'' (nobody) that take the negative form of the verb: (examples from [http://www.mikmaqonline.org/ Mi'gmaq Online Dictionary])

<gl>
\gll me' mnaq newt ajiegw
NEG yet one time-NEG-3
\trans it is not one o’clock yet
</gl>

<gl>
\gll mu-wen mijji-gw
NEG-who eat-NEG-3
\trans no one is eating
</gl>

<gl>
\gll mu goqwei etn-u-g
no thing be-NEG-3
\trans there is nothing there
</gl>

Below is a list of common particles after which the negated form is used. This list is not complete but these are the most common forms.

{| class="wikitable"
! Particle || When used || Translation
|-
| ''mu''
| before negated present and past
| not
|-
| ''mutt''
| before negated imperative
| do not
|-
| '''lpa mu''
| before negated present and past
| not even
|-
| ''mu wen''
| before negated present, past and future
| no one/nobody
|-
| ''mu goqwei'''
| before negated present, past and future
| nothing
|-
| ''me' mnaq''
| before negated verb
| not yet
|-
| ''ma' ''
| before negated future verb and preverb ''gis'' (can)
| not
|-
|}

''moqwa' goqwei'' is also spelled ''mu goqwei'' and a variant of this is ''mu'' + negated verb + ''goqwei'' when used in object position. It is inanimate. As in the following example:

<gl>
\gll mu malqutm-u goqwei
NEG eat.1>0-NEG what
\trans I eat nothing
</gl>

== Negative Concord ==
As can be seen above, Mi'gmaq is a negative concord language. Negative concord is where "double or multiple negative[s] [do] not express an affirmative but a negative" (van der Wouden & Zwarts, 1992). This is similar to French ''Je n'ai vue personne'' 'I have seen nobody' where both the ''ne'' and ''personne'' are both negative but the resulting sentence is negative, rather than each cancelling the other out resulting in a affirmative sentence, i.e. 'I have seen someone'. Mi'gmaq has negation marked in two places with both negative particles, i.e. ''mu'' & ''ma'', and a negative conjugation of the verb, i.e. with ''-u'' or ''-w'' added. Compare examples <glr id="1"/> and <glr id="2"/>.

<gl id="1">
\gll 'lpa'tuj eig'-p
boy be.there.PST-SG
\trans the boy was there
</gl>

<gl id="2">
\gll 'lpa'tuj mu eimu-g-u-p
boy NEG be.there-PST-NEG-SG
\trans the boy was not there
</gl>

= Word Order =
The negative particle (or possibly affix) ''mu'' always appears before the verb it negates. Although words can intervene between ''mu'' and the verb it negates, ''mu'' must always precede the verb.

<gl>
\gll Mali mu amal-gag-u-p
Mali NEG dance-PAST-NEG-SG
\trans Mali did not dance
</gl>

<gl>
\gll mu Mali amal-gag-u-p
NEG Mali dance-PAST-NEG-SG
\trans Mali did not dance
</gl>

Placement of ''mu'' post-verbally results in ungrammaticality, as illustrated below.

<gl>
\gll 'lpa'tuj mu eimug-u-p
boy NEG be.there.PST-NEG-SG
\trans the boy was not there
</gl>

Acceptable word orders:
*mu eimugup 'lpa'tuj
*mu 'lpa'tuj eimugup

Unacceptable word orders:
* *eimugup 'lpa'tuj mu
* *eimugup mu 'lpa'tuj
* *'lpa'tuj eimugup mu

Furthermore, with regards to word order, it appears that negation must come right before the constituent it negates. Here is an example sentence without negation:

<gl>
\gll ula na 'lpa'tuj ta'n egitg'p wi'gatign
this DEM boy that read.PST book
\trans this is the boy that read the book
</gl>

If we want to negate the first clause, as to say "This is '''not''' the boy that read the book", negation must directly precede 'boy'.

<gl>
\gll ula na mu 'lpa'tuj ta'n egitg'p wi'gatign
this DEM NEG boy that read.PST book
\trans this is not the boy that read the book
</gl>

The following word orders for negation in the first clause are impossible: *TO CHECK
* *ula na 'lpa'tuj mu...
* *ula mu na 'lpa'tuj...
* *mu ula na 'lpa'tuj...

If we want to negate the second clause, as to say "This is the boy that did '''not''' read the book", the word order may be varied, as long as negation comes before the verb (as discussed previously).

== Scope of Negation ==
As stated above, ''mu'' always comes before the verb. There may be particles that intrude between ''mu'' and the negated verb, but as long as ''mu'' comes before the negated verb, the structure is grammatical. [http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED136614.pdf Micmac Grammar, 1976] Sometimes the meaning of the sentence can change depending on the position of ''mu''.

<gl>
\gll 'gjitm Mali mu amal-gag-u-p
possible Mali NEG dance-PST-NEG-SG
\trans it is true that Mali did not dance
</gl>

*CHECK MORE

We would also expect phrases with adverb-like particles translatable as "it is possible" or "it is true" or "it is obvious" would also vary regarding negation.

=Language change and negation=
Often I was not able to elicit both the dual and plural forms of a verb. There are many times when I could only elicit the dual form, or times when the dual and plural forms were the same. It has been noted by our consultants that younger speakers are not using the plural forms but are using the dual form to mean both dual and plural. This seems be a language change happening currently in the speech community where the younger generation is leading the change. As noted in the paradigm above for 'eat' in the negated present tense, both dual and plural forms are the same. Here it seems that the plural form is used for both dual and plural meanings. This would strongly suggest a change happening in the speech community.

=References=
Clark, Jeremiah S. "A Dictionary of the Micmac Language." Rand's Micmac Dictionary. Charlottetown, PEI: The Patriot Publishing Company, 1902. Print.

Delisle, Gill L., and Manny L. Metallic. Micmac Teaching Grammar. Ecowi, QC: Thunderbird Press, 1976. Print.

L'Abbe Maillard, M. Grammaire De La Langue Mikmaque. New York: Presse Cramoisy de Jean-Marie Shea, 1864. Print.

Metallic, Janine. "Mi'gmaq Elicitation Session for Field Methods of Linguistics." Ed. Class, Carol Little and LING415. Montreal, QC: n/a, 2011. Print.

Payne, Thomas Edward. Describing Morphosyntax: a Guide for Field Linguists. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge UP, 2008. Print.

Paul-Martin, Patsy. "Mi'kmaq Verb Conjugation." Ed. Orthography, Mi'kmaq Talking Posters Smith/Francis. Truto, NS: Eastern Woodland Print Communications, 2011. Print.

Proulx, Paul. "Proto-Algonquian Verb Inflection." Studies in Native American Languages 15.2 (1990): 100-45. Print.

van der Wouden, Ton, and Frans Zwarts. "Negative Concord." D. Gilbers and S. Looyenga (eds), Language and Cognition 2. Yearbook 1992 Linguistic Theory and Knowledge Representation of the University of Groningen (1992): 317-31. Print.

Negation

2014-08-19T13:35:45Z

Carol: /* Future Tense */

=Introduction=
Negation is the process of turning affirmative statements into the opposite form. For example, the negative equivalent of affirmative sentence, ''I am eating'' is ''I am not eating''. In English there are a few processes at work. ''not'' must always come with an auxiliary verb like the verb 'to have' and 'to be'. In Mi'gmaq, with its extremely detailed and expansive verb conjugations in the present, it is not surprising that the negated conjugation of verbs is just as detailed and expansive as they are in the affirmative.

To start off any commentary on negation, it seems fitting to start of with the word "no" which is ''moqwa'' in Mi'gmaq. (The opposite of this is ''e'e'' , meaning "yes".) Negation in Mi'gmaq is similar to that of Obijwe in that there is both an affix that occurs between the verb and the person marker and a word that comes before the verb denoting negation. See [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ojibwe_grammar#Verbs Verb Conjugation in Ojibwe]. The Mi'gmaq negated affix is ''w'' or ''u'' which is very closely related to the Proto-Algonquian form for negation which is is ''*-w'' ( [http://kuscholarworks.ku.edu/dspace/bitstream/1808/440/1/ling.wp.v15.n2.paper6.pdf Proulx, 1990] ). ''w'' or ''u'' are very closely related phonetically since ''w'' is the semivowel corresponding to the vowel ''u''. Bear in mind that during the elicitation sessions, sometimes it was unsure whether to use ''w'' or ''u''.

Negation in Mi'gmaq consists of adding ''mu'' or ''ma'' then the verb conjugated in the negated verb form. After ''mu'' or ''ma'' the verb must always contain a negative particle. We must think of these two things as inseparable. ''mu'' always comes before the negative conjugated verb in the present or past, and ''ma'' always comes before future or if the prefix ''gis'' ('can', 'to be able to') is attached to the verb. All other prefixes abide by the rules ''mu'' before present or past and ''ma'' before future. There are other particles that take the negated form of the verb, but it is obvious that these particles express a negated idea.

Please note as well that in some of the studies on Mi'gmaq and Algonquian languages the term 'nonaffirmative' is used to describe the negated form. For consistency in this report, I will use the term 'negated' to indicate the form of the verb which is the opposite of affirmative. 'Nonaffirmative' and 'negated' however refer to the same process of negation.

= Conjugation of the Negated Verb =
I have selected the verb ''mijji'' (to eat). Please note that some resources spell this like ''mijji'' where other spell it ''miji'' ([http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED136614.pdf Micmac Teaching Grammar, 1976]). I have selected the spelling from [http://www.mikmaqonline.org/servlet/dictionaryFrameSet.html?arg0=mijjit&method=searchFromMikmaq the Migmaq talking dictionary]. It is also important to note that the Micmac Teaching Grammar uses an orthography that is different of all other orthographies used with Mi'gmaq. I will indicate which terms they are and give the Listuguj equivalent orthographical manner of writing them.

The simplified formula for the conjugation in the negated form: the base form + ''u'' or ''w'' + person ending ([http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED136614.pdf Micmac Teaching Grammar, 1976])
The base form for intransitive verbs is always the verb in the first person singular. For example I eat is ''mijji''. Now to create the second person singular we add the ending -''n'' denoting second person singular and get the form ''mijjin''. For another type of verb (henceforth referred to as the ''a'' verbs) we take the base form ''amalga-'' and add -''n'' to get ''amalgan'' (you dance) and to get the first person singular we add -''i''. Please note that it has been hypothesized that there are at least eleven different conjugations. We will only be dealing with a couple here. Because of reasons of time limitation, I was not able to elicit all eleven types but when there is a difference in conjugation, that will be noted. Note that in the plural the ''u'' or ''w'' comes after ''-ulti-''. This could be due the the fact that ''-ulti-'' is the plural affix that attaches to the base form of the verb and does not convey anything about the tense of the verb, rather it is used to denote that the verb is plural. Thus the ''u'' or ''w'' comes right before the tense marker which is always at the end of the verb. For the first person singular in present there is a null tense marker at the end of some verbs (for example the ''-i'' verbs) thus the negative marker is at the end.

== Present Tense ==
First is a comparison of the affirmative and negated paradigms of the verb ''mijji'' ('eat').

{| class="wikitable"
|+ mijji- 'eat'
|-
! scope="col" colspan="2"| ↓person / number→
! scope="col" | SG
! scope="col" | DU
! scope="col" | PL
|-
! scope="row" rowspan="2"| 1
! scope="row"| 13
| rowspan="2" | mijji
|mijjieg
|mijjultieg
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| mijji'gw
| mijjulti'gw
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2" | 2
| mijjin
| mijjioq
| mijjultioq
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2"| 3
| mijjit
| mijjijig
| mijjultijig
|-
|}

{| class="wikitable"
|+ mu mijji- 'not eat'
|-
! scope="col" colspan="2"| ↓person / number→
! scope="col" | SG
! scope="col" | DU
! scope="col" | PL
|-
! scope="row" rowspan="2"| 1
! scope="row"| 13
| rowspan="2" | mu mijjiw
| mu mijjiweg
| mu mijjultiweg
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| mu mijjigw
| mu mijjultigw
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2" | 2
| mu mijjiun
| mu mijjiwoq
| mu mijjultiwoq
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2"| 3
| mu mijjigw
| mu mijji'gw
| mu mijjulti'gw
|-
|}

The word ''mu'' signifies negation. When ''mu'' is in front of the verb, the verb must also be conjugated in the negative form. In the above table we see the intrusion of the sound ''u'', ''ew'' or ''w''. The following table illustrates the endings for the present negative tense, keeping in mind ''mu'' must ALWAYS come right before the negated verb. When ''mu'' precedes a verb it must ALWAYS be in the negated form.

Below is a table that summarizes the VAI -i stem negative person endings in present conjugation. Inanimate [IN] conjugation was taken from the Micmac Grammar (1976, pg 155).

{| class="wikitable"
|+ VAI -i stem negative present person endings
|-
! scope="col" colspan="2"| ↓person / number→
! scope="col" | SG
! scope="col" | DU
! scope="col" | PL
|-
! scope="row" rowspan="2"| 1
! scope="row"| 13
| rowspan="2" |-u
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2" | 2
| -
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2"| 3.AN
| -
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2"| 3.IN
| -
| -
| -
|-
|}

The forms for the first person dual and plural in the exclusive and inclusive forms are the same. As shown by other data, the dual form seems to be in the process of disappearing. This is one such example where the dual form does not exist for the plural first person. Some younger speakers do not use the dual form at all so it is not surprising that we find a gap in the dual form here. All this is according to the speaker but if we followed the pattern of the previous forms we would expect the dual form for the inclusive and exclusive first person to be ''-ieweg''. "When the verb is negated, then the -g third person is ALWAYS found" (Micmac Grammar, 1976 pg 93).

Below is a comparison of different verbs to give an idea of how to conjugate different types of verbs in the negated form. All forms are conjugated in the present singular third person animate. The form of -''elie-'' was taken from Micmac Grammar (pg 155). For more detail about these forms see [[VAI]].

{| class="wikitable"
! VAI stem || Base Form || Gloss || Affirmative || Gloss || Negated || Gloss
|-
| -i
| mijji-
| eat
| mijjit
| s/he eats
| mu mijjigw
| s/he does not eat
|-
| -a
| amalga-
| dance
| amalgat
| s/he dances
| mu amalgagw
| s/he does not dance
|-
| -a'si
| ala'si-
| go around
| ala'sit
| s/he goes around
| mu ala'sigw
| s/he does not go around
|-
| -e
| elie-
| go
| eliet
| s/he goes
| mu eliegw
| s/he does not go
|-
|}

For verb conjugations in the affirmative please see [http://firstnationhelp.com/ali/posters/pdf/verb_conjugation.pdf Mi'kmaq Verb Conjugation]. As you can see, this site uses the verb ''mijisi'' meaning 'to eat'. In Listuguj this is not used as the word for to eat because it sounds too close for the verb ''mejisi'' 'to excrete'.

=== Transitive ===
Below is the conjugation in present of a transitive verb that takes an inanimate object.

{| class="wikitable" style="text-align:center"
|+ VTI Conjugation Class 1: -m class
|-
! scope="col" | ↓subject / object→
! scope="col" | 0SG
! scope="col" | 0PL
|-
! scope="row" | 1
| malqutm
| malqutmann
|-
! scope="row" | 13
| malqutmeg
| malqutmegl
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| malqutmu'g
| malqutmu'gul
|-
! scope="row" | 2
| malqutmn
| malqutmnn
|-
! scope="row" | 2PL
| malqutmoq
| malqutmoqol
|-
! scope="row" | 3
| malqutmeg
| malqutmegl
|-
! scope="row" | 3PL
| malqutmi'tij
| malqutmi'titl
|}

{| class="wikitable" style="text-align:center"
|+ VTI Negative Conjugation Class 1: -m class
|-
! scope="col" | ↓subject / object→
! scope="col" | 0SG
! scope="col" | 0PL
|-
! scope="row" | 1
| mu malqutmu
| mu malqutmuann
|-
! scope="row" | 13
| mu malqutmueg
| mu malqutmuegl
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| mu malqutmugg
| mu malqutmuggul
|-
! scope="row" | 2
| mu malqutmu'n
| mu malqutmu'nn
|-
! scope="row" | 2PL
| mu malqutmuoq
| mu malqutmuoqol
|-
! scope="row" | 3
| mu malqutmug
| mu malqutmugul
|-
! scope="row" | 3PL
| mu malqutmi'tigw
| mu malqutmi'tigul
|-
|}

{| class="wikitable" style="text-align:center"
|+ VTI Negative Conjugation Class 1: -m class
|-
! scope="col" | ↓subject / object→
! scope="col" | 0SG
! scope="col" | 0PL
|-
! scope="row" | 1
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 13
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 12
|
|
|-
! scope="row" | 2
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 2PL
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 3
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 3PL
| -
| -
|-
|}

== Imperative ==
Here is the formation of the affirmative imperative:
{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijji-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 2 Second person
| mijji
| mijjigw
| mijjultigw
|-
|}

Now we compare it to the negated:
{| class="wikitable"
! ''mutt mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 2 Second person
| mutt mijjiw
| mutt mijjinew
| mutt mijjultinew
|-
|}

== Past Tense ==
Again for the past we compare the past and the negated past.

{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| mijjiap
| mijjieg'p
| mijjultieg'p
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| mijji'gup
| mijjulti'gup
|-
| 2 Second person
| mijjit'p
| mijjioqop
| mijjultioqop
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| mijjip
| mijjipnig
| mijjultipnig
|}

Now let us look at the negated forms.

{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| mu mijjiwap
| mu mijjiweg'p
| mu mijjultiweg'p
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| mu mijjiwgup
| mu mijjultiwgup/mijjultiggup
|-
| 2 Second person
| mu mijjiwt'p
| mu mijjiwoqop
| mu mijjultiwoqop
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| mu mijjigup
| mu mijjigupnig
| mu mijjultigupnig
|}

Thus this would be the conjugation of the negated form:

{| class="wikitable"
! Negated Past||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| -
| -
| -
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| -
| -
|-
| 2 Second person
| -
| -
| -
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| -
|
|
|}

For the third person the -''ug'p'' can change to -''weg'p'' for example:

<gl>
\gll Mu ala'ti-we-g'p
not go-NEG-SG.PAST
\trans She didn't go
</gl>

== Future Tense ==
Affirmative tense for eat:

{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| mijjit's/mijjia's(List)
| mijjitesnen
| mijjultitesnen
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| mijjitesnu
| mijjultitesnu
|-
| 2 Second person
| mijjit'sg
| mijjitoqs'p
| mijjultitoqs'p
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| mijjitew
| mijjitaq
| mijjultitaq
|}

Future negated below:

{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| ma' mijjiw
| ma' mijjiweg
| ma' mijjultiweg
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| ma' mijjigw
| ma' mijjultigw
|-
| 2 Second person
| ma' mijjiun
| ma' mijjiwoq
| ma' mijjultiwoq
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| ma' mijjigw
| ma' mijji'gw
| ma' mijjulti'gw
|}
NOTE: In the future the ''mu'' changes to ''ma' '' !! Like ''mu'', ''ma'' must always come before the verb conjugated in the negative future.

Paradigm of the negated endings in the future.

{| class="wikitable"
! Negated Future||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| -
| -
| -
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
|
| -
| -
|-
| 2 Second person
| -
|
|
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
|
|
|
|}

As you may have noticed the future tense is easy! The verbs take the same endings as the negated present tense but the ''mu'' is replaced with ''ma'' thus indicating future.

== When negation is used ==

When the verb is negated there must always find a negative particle (like ''mu'' or ''ma''). If not the sentence is ungrammatical as shown below:

<gl>
\gll *gis-wissugwatige-w
can-cook.1-NEG
\trans I cannot cook (intended meaning)
</gl>

The only form of the above sentence must be:

<gl>
\gll ma' gis-wissugwatige-w
NEG can-cook.1-NEG
\trans I cannot cook at this time
</gl>

<gl>
\gll mu gis-wissugwatige-w
can-cook.1-NEG
\trans I am unable to cook (something is preventing me from cooking)
</gl>

Thus it is seen that ''ma' '' comes before the verb, now making the sentence grammatical.

''ma' '' always precedes the future tense AND when the ''gis'' prefix is attached to the verb conjugated in the present for example:

<gl>
\gll ma' gis-amalga-w-g
NEG can-dance-NEG-3
\trans s/he cannot dance
</gl>

There are some expressions that always take the negative form of the verb such as ''me menga'' (not yet) and ''mowen'' (nobody) that take the negative form of the verb: (examples from [http://www.mikmaqonline.org/ Mi'gmaq Online Dictionary])

<gl>
\gll me' mnaq newt ajiegw
NEG yet one time-NEG-3
\trans it is not one o’clock yet
</gl>

<gl>
\gll mu-wen mijji-gw
NEG-who eat-NEG-3
\trans no one is eating
</gl>

<gl>
\gll mu goqwei etn-u-g
no thing be-NEG-3
\trans there is nothing there
</gl>

Below is a list of common particles after which the negated form is used. This list is not complete but these are the most common forms.

{| class="wikitable"
! Particle || When used || Translation
|-
| ''mu''
| before negated present and past
| not
|-
| ''mutt''
| before negated imperative
| do not
|-
| '''lpa mu''
| before negated present and past
| not even
|-
| ''mu wen''
| before negated present, past and future
| no one/nobody
|-
| ''mu goqwei'''
| before negated present, past and future
| nothing
|-
| ''me' mnaq''
| before negated verb
| not yet
|-
| ''ma' ''
| before negated future verb and preverb ''gis'' (can)
| not
|-
|}

''moqwa' goqwei'' is also spelled ''mu goqwei'' and a variant of this is ''mu'' + negated verb + ''goqwei'' when used in object position. It is inanimate. As in the following example:

<gl>
\gll mu malqutm-u goqwei
NEG eat.1>0-NEG what
\trans I eat nothing
</gl>

== Negative Concord ==
As can be seen above, Mi'gmaq is a negative concord language. Negative concord is where "double or multiple negative[s] [do] not express an affirmative but a negative" (van der Wouden & Zwarts, 1992). This is similar to French ''Je n'ai vue personne'' 'I have seen nobody' where both the ''ne'' and ''personne'' are both negative but the resulting sentence is negative, rather than each cancelling the other out resulting in a affirmative sentence, i.e. 'I have seen someone'. Mi'gmaq has negation marked in two places with both negative particles, i.e. ''mu'' & ''ma'', and a negative conjugation of the verb, i.e. with ''-u'' or ''-w'' added. Compare examples <glr id="1"/> and <glr id="2"/>.

<gl id="1">
\gll 'lpa'tuj eig'-p
boy be.there.PST-SG
\trans the boy was there
</gl>

<gl id="2">
\gll 'lpa'tuj mu eimu-g-u-p
boy NEG be.there-PST-NEG-SG
\trans the boy was not there
</gl>

= Word Order =
The negative particle (or possibly affix) ''mu'' always appears before the verb it negates. Although words can intervene between ''mu'' and the verb it negates, ''mu'' must always precede the verb.

<gl>
\gll Mali mu amal-gag-u-p
Mali NEG dance-PAST-NEG-SG
\trans Mali did not dance
</gl>

<gl>
\gll mu Mali amal-gag-u-p
NEG Mali dance-PAST-NEG-SG
\trans Mali did not dance
</gl>

Placement of ''mu'' post-verbally results in ungrammaticality, as illustrated below.

<gl>
\gll 'lpa'tuj mu eimug-u-p
boy NEG be.there.PST-NEG-SG
\trans the boy was not there
</gl>

Acceptable word orders:
*mu eimugup 'lpa'tuj
*mu 'lpa'tuj eimugup

Unacceptable word orders:
* *eimugup 'lpa'tuj mu
* *eimugup mu 'lpa'tuj
* *'lpa'tuj eimugup mu

Furthermore, with regards to word order, it appears that negation must come right before the constituent it negates. Here is an example sentence without negation:

<gl>
\gll ula na 'lpa'tuj ta'n egitg'p wi'gatign
this DEM boy that read.PST book
\trans this is the boy that read the book
</gl>

If we want to negate the first clause, as to say "This is '''not''' the boy that read the book", negation must directly precede 'boy'.

<gl>
\gll ula na mu 'lpa'tuj ta'n egitg'p wi'gatign
this DEM NEG boy that read.PST book
\trans this is not the boy that read the book
</gl>

The following word orders for negation in the first clause are impossible: *TO CHECK
* *ula na 'lpa'tuj mu...
* *ula mu na 'lpa'tuj...
* *mu ula na 'lpa'tuj...

If we want to negate the second clause, as to say "This is the boy that did '''not''' read the book", the word order may be varied, as long as negation comes before the verb (as discussed previously).

== Scope of Negation ==
As stated above, ''mu'' always comes before the verb. There may be particles that intrude between ''mu'' and the negated verb, but as long as ''mu'' comes before the negated verb, the structure is grammatical. [http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED136614.pdf Micmac Grammar, 1976] Sometimes the meaning of the sentence can change depending on the position of ''mu''.

<gl>
\gll 'gjitm Mali mu amal-gag-u-p
possible Mali NEG dance-PST-NEG-SG
\trans it is true that Mali did not dance
</gl>

*CHECK MORE

We would also expect phrases with adverb-like particles translatable as "it is possible" or "it is true" or "it is obvious" would also vary regarding negation.

=Language change and negation=
Often I was not able to elicit both the dual and plural forms of a verb. There are many times when I could only elicit the dual form, or times when the dual and plural forms were the same. It has been noted by our consultants that younger speakers are not using the plural forms but are using the dual form to mean both dual and plural. This seems be a language change happening currently in the speech community where the younger generation is leading the change. As noted in the paradigm above for 'eat' in the negated present tense, both dual and plural forms are the same. Here it seems that the plural form is used for both dual and plural meanings. This would strongly suggest a change happening in the speech community.

=References=
Clark, Jeremiah S. "A Dictionary of the Micmac Language." Rand's Micmac Dictionary. Charlottetown, PEI: The Patriot Publishing Company, 1902. Print.

Delisle, Gill L., and Manny L. Metallic. Micmac Teaching Grammar. Ecowi, QC: Thunderbird Press, 1976. Print.

L'Abbe Maillard, M. Grammaire De La Langue Mikmaque. New York: Presse Cramoisy de Jean-Marie Shea, 1864. Print.

Metallic, Janine. "Mi'gmaq Elicitation Session for Field Methods of Linguistics." Ed. Class, Carol Little and LING415. Montreal, QC: n/a, 2011. Print.

Payne, Thomas Edward. Describing Morphosyntax: a Guide for Field Linguists. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge UP, 2008. Print.

Paul-Martin, Patsy. "Mi'kmaq Verb Conjugation." Ed. Orthography, Mi'kmaq Talking Posters Smith/Francis. Truto, NS: Eastern Woodland Print Communications, 2011. Print.

Proulx, Paul. "Proto-Algonquian Verb Inflection." Studies in Native American Languages 15.2 (1990): 100-45. Print.

van der Wouden, Ton, and Frans Zwarts. "Negative Concord." D. Gilbers and S. Looyenga (eds), Language and Cognition 2. Yearbook 1992 Linguistic Theory and Knowledge Representation of the University of Groningen (1992): 317-31. Print.

Negation

2014-08-19T13:35:16Z

Carol: /* Future Tense */

=Introduction=
Negation is the process of turning affirmative statements into the opposite form. For example, the negative equivalent of affirmative sentence, ''I am eating'' is ''I am not eating''. In English there are a few processes at work. ''not'' must always come with an auxiliary verb like the verb 'to have' and 'to be'. In Mi'gmaq, with its extremely detailed and expansive verb conjugations in the present, it is not surprising that the negated conjugation of verbs is just as detailed and expansive as they are in the affirmative.

To start off any commentary on negation, it seems fitting to start of with the word "no" which is ''moqwa'' in Mi'gmaq. (The opposite of this is ''e'e'' , meaning "yes".) Negation in Mi'gmaq is similar to that of Obijwe in that there is both an affix that occurs between the verb and the person marker and a word that comes before the verb denoting negation. See [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ojibwe_grammar#Verbs Verb Conjugation in Ojibwe]. The Mi'gmaq negated affix is ''w'' or ''u'' which is very closely related to the Proto-Algonquian form for negation which is is ''*-w'' ( [http://kuscholarworks.ku.edu/dspace/bitstream/1808/440/1/ling.wp.v15.n2.paper6.pdf Proulx, 1990] ). ''w'' or ''u'' are very closely related phonetically since ''w'' is the semivowel corresponding to the vowel ''u''. Bear in mind that during the elicitation sessions, sometimes it was unsure whether to use ''w'' or ''u''.

Negation in Mi'gmaq consists of adding ''mu'' or ''ma'' then the verb conjugated in the negated verb form. After ''mu'' or ''ma'' the verb must always contain a negative particle. We must think of these two things as inseparable. ''mu'' always comes before the negative conjugated verb in the present or past, and ''ma'' always comes before future or if the prefix ''gis'' ('can', 'to be able to') is attached to the verb. All other prefixes abide by the rules ''mu'' before present or past and ''ma'' before future. There are other particles that take the negated form of the verb, but it is obvious that these particles express a negated idea.

Please note as well that in some of the studies on Mi'gmaq and Algonquian languages the term 'nonaffirmative' is used to describe the negated form. For consistency in this report, I will use the term 'negated' to indicate the form of the verb which is the opposite of affirmative. 'Nonaffirmative' and 'negated' however refer to the same process of negation.

= Conjugation of the Negated Verb =
I have selected the verb ''mijji'' (to eat). Please note that some resources spell this like ''mijji'' where other spell it ''miji'' ([http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED136614.pdf Micmac Teaching Grammar, 1976]). I have selected the spelling from [http://www.mikmaqonline.org/servlet/dictionaryFrameSet.html?arg0=mijjit&method=searchFromMikmaq the Migmaq talking dictionary]. It is also important to note that the Micmac Teaching Grammar uses an orthography that is different of all other orthographies used with Mi'gmaq. I will indicate which terms they are and give the Listuguj equivalent orthographical manner of writing them.

The simplified formula for the conjugation in the negated form: the base form + ''u'' or ''w'' + person ending ([http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED136614.pdf Micmac Teaching Grammar, 1976])
The base form for intransitive verbs is always the verb in the first person singular. For example I eat is ''mijji''. Now to create the second person singular we add the ending -''n'' denoting second person singular and get the form ''mijjin''. For another type of verb (henceforth referred to as the ''a'' verbs) we take the base form ''amalga-'' and add -''n'' to get ''amalgan'' (you dance) and to get the first person singular we add -''i''. Please note that it has been hypothesized that there are at least eleven different conjugations. We will only be dealing with a couple here. Because of reasons of time limitation, I was not able to elicit all eleven types but when there is a difference in conjugation, that will be noted. Note that in the plural the ''u'' or ''w'' comes after ''-ulti-''. This could be due the the fact that ''-ulti-'' is the plural affix that attaches to the base form of the verb and does not convey anything about the tense of the verb, rather it is used to denote that the verb is plural. Thus the ''u'' or ''w'' comes right before the tense marker which is always at the end of the verb. For the first person singular in present there is a null tense marker at the end of some verbs (for example the ''-i'' verbs) thus the negative marker is at the end.

== Present Tense ==
First is a comparison of the affirmative and negated paradigms of the verb ''mijji'' ('eat').

{| class="wikitable"
|+ mijji- 'eat'
|-
! scope="col" colspan="2"| ↓person / number→
! scope="col" | SG
! scope="col" | DU
! scope="col" | PL
|-
! scope="row" rowspan="2"| 1
! scope="row"| 13
| rowspan="2" | mijji
|mijjieg
|mijjultieg
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| mijji'gw
| mijjulti'gw
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2" | 2
| mijjin
| mijjioq
| mijjultioq
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2"| 3
| mijjit
| mijjijig
| mijjultijig
|-
|}

{| class="wikitable"
|+ mu mijji- 'not eat'
|-
! scope="col" colspan="2"| ↓person / number→
! scope="col" | SG
! scope="col" | DU
! scope="col" | PL
|-
! scope="row" rowspan="2"| 1
! scope="row"| 13
| rowspan="2" | mu mijjiw
| mu mijjiweg
| mu mijjultiweg
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| mu mijjigw
| mu mijjultigw
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2" | 2
| mu mijjiun
| mu mijjiwoq
| mu mijjultiwoq
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2"| 3
| mu mijjigw
| mu mijji'gw
| mu mijjulti'gw
|-
|}

The word ''mu'' signifies negation. When ''mu'' is in front of the verb, the verb must also be conjugated in the negative form. In the above table we see the intrusion of the sound ''u'', ''ew'' or ''w''. The following table illustrates the endings for the present negative tense, keeping in mind ''mu'' must ALWAYS come right before the negated verb. When ''mu'' precedes a verb it must ALWAYS be in the negated form.

Below is a table that summarizes the VAI -i stem negative person endings in present conjugation. Inanimate [IN] conjugation was taken from the Micmac Grammar (1976, pg 155).

{| class="wikitable"
|+ VAI -i stem negative present person endings
|-
! scope="col" colspan="2"| ↓person / number→
! scope="col" | SG
! scope="col" | DU
! scope="col" | PL
|-
! scope="row" rowspan="2"| 1
! scope="row"| 13
| rowspan="2" |-u
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2" | 2
| -
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2"| 3.AN
| -
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2"| 3.IN
| -
| -
| -
|-
|}

The forms for the first person dual and plural in the exclusive and inclusive forms are the same. As shown by other data, the dual form seems to be in the process of disappearing. This is one such example where the dual form does not exist for the plural first person. Some younger speakers do not use the dual form at all so it is not surprising that we find a gap in the dual form here. All this is according to the speaker but if we followed the pattern of the previous forms we would expect the dual form for the inclusive and exclusive first person to be ''-ieweg''. "When the verb is negated, then the -g third person is ALWAYS found" (Micmac Grammar, 1976 pg 93).

Below is a comparison of different verbs to give an idea of how to conjugate different types of verbs in the negated form. All forms are conjugated in the present singular third person animate. The form of -''elie-'' was taken from Micmac Grammar (pg 155). For more detail about these forms see [[VAI]].

{| class="wikitable"
! VAI stem || Base Form || Gloss || Affirmative || Gloss || Negated || Gloss
|-
| -i
| mijji-
| eat
| mijjit
| s/he eats
| mu mijjigw
| s/he does not eat
|-
| -a
| amalga-
| dance
| amalgat
| s/he dances
| mu amalgagw
| s/he does not dance
|-
| -a'si
| ala'si-
| go around
| ala'sit
| s/he goes around
| mu ala'sigw
| s/he does not go around
|-
| -e
| elie-
| go
| eliet
| s/he goes
| mu eliegw
| s/he does not go
|-
|}

For verb conjugations in the affirmative please see [http://firstnationhelp.com/ali/posters/pdf/verb_conjugation.pdf Mi'kmaq Verb Conjugation]. As you can see, this site uses the verb ''mijisi'' meaning 'to eat'. In Listuguj this is not used as the word for to eat because it sounds too close for the verb ''mejisi'' 'to excrete'.

=== Transitive ===
Below is the conjugation in present of a transitive verb that takes an inanimate object.

{| class="wikitable" style="text-align:center"
|+ VTI Conjugation Class 1: -m class
|-
! scope="col" | ↓subject / object→
! scope="col" | 0SG
! scope="col" | 0PL
|-
! scope="row" | 1
| malqutm
| malqutmann
|-
! scope="row" | 13
| malqutmeg
| malqutmegl
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| malqutmu'g
| malqutmu'gul
|-
! scope="row" | 2
| malqutmn
| malqutmnn
|-
! scope="row" | 2PL
| malqutmoq
| malqutmoqol
|-
! scope="row" | 3
| malqutmeg
| malqutmegl
|-
! scope="row" | 3PL
| malqutmi'tij
| malqutmi'titl
|}

{| class="wikitable" style="text-align:center"
|+ VTI Negative Conjugation Class 1: -m class
|-
! scope="col" | ↓subject / object→
! scope="col" | 0SG
! scope="col" | 0PL
|-
! scope="row" | 1
| mu malqutmu
| mu malqutmuann
|-
! scope="row" | 13
| mu malqutmueg
| mu malqutmuegl
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| mu malqutmugg
| mu malqutmuggul
|-
! scope="row" | 2
| mu malqutmu'n
| mu malqutmu'nn
|-
! scope="row" | 2PL
| mu malqutmuoq
| mu malqutmuoqol
|-
! scope="row" | 3
| mu malqutmug
| mu malqutmugul
|-
! scope="row" | 3PL
| mu malqutmi'tigw
| mu malqutmi'tigul
|-
|}

{| class="wikitable" style="text-align:center"
|+ VTI Negative Conjugation Class 1: -m class
|-
! scope="col" | ↓subject / object→
! scope="col" | 0SG
! scope="col" | 0PL
|-
! scope="row" | 1
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 13
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 12
|
|
|-
! scope="row" | 2
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 2PL
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 3
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 3PL
| -
| -
|-
|}

== Imperative ==
Here is the formation of the affirmative imperative:
{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijji-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 2 Second person
| mijji
| mijjigw
| mijjultigw
|-
|}

Now we compare it to the negated:
{| class="wikitable"
! ''mutt mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 2 Second person
| mutt mijjiw
| mutt mijjinew
| mutt mijjultinew
|-
|}

== Past Tense ==
Again for the past we compare the past and the negated past.

{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| mijjiap
| mijjieg'p
| mijjultieg'p
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| mijji'gup
| mijjulti'gup
|-
| 2 Second person
| mijjit'p
| mijjioqop
| mijjultioqop
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| mijjip
| mijjipnig
| mijjultipnig
|}

Now let us look at the negated forms.

{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| mu mijjiwap
| mu mijjiweg'p
| mu mijjultiweg'p
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| mu mijjiwgup
| mu mijjultiwgup/mijjultiggup
|-
| 2 Second person
| mu mijjiwt'p
| mu mijjiwoqop
| mu mijjultiwoqop
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| mu mijjigup
| mu mijjigupnig
| mu mijjultigupnig
|}

Thus this would be the conjugation of the negated form:

{| class="wikitable"
! Negated Past||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| -
| -
| -
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| -
| -
|-
| 2 Second person
| -
| -
| -
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| -
|
|
|}

For the third person the -''ug'p'' can change to -''weg'p'' for example:

<gl>
\gll Mu ala'ti-we-g'p
not go-NEG-SG.PAST
\trans She didn't go
</gl>

== Future Tense ==
Affirmative tense for eat:

{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| mijjit's/mijjia's(List)
| mijjitesnen
| mijjultitesnen
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| mijjitesnu
| mijjultitesnu
|-
| 2 Second person
| mijjit'sg
| mijjitoqs'p
| mijjultitoqs'p
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| mijjitew
| mijjitaq
| mijjultitaq
|}

Future negated below:

{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| ma' mijjiw
| ma' mijjiweg
| ma' mijjultiweg
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| ma' mijjigw
| ma' mijjultigw
|-
| 2 Second person
| ma' mijjiun
| ma' mijjiwoq
| ma' mijjultiwoq
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| ma' mijjigw
| ma' mijji'gw
| ma' mijjulti'gw
|}
NOTE: In the future the ''mu'' changes to ''ma' '' !! Like ''mu'', ''ma'' must always come before the verb conjugated in the negative future.
The correspondent was not able to produce a dual form in the future.

Now here is a paradigm of the negated endings in the future.

{| class="wikitable"
! Negated Future||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| -
| -
| -
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
|
| -
| -
|-
| 2 Second person
| -
|
|
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
|
|
|
|}

As you may have noticed the future tense is easy! The verbs take the same endings as the negated present tense but the ''mu'' is replaced with ''ma'' thus indicating future.

== When negation is used ==

When the verb is negated there must always find a negative particle (like ''mu'' or ''ma''). If not the sentence is ungrammatical as shown below:

<gl>
\gll *gis-wissugwatige-w
can-cook.1-NEG
\trans I cannot cook (intended meaning)
</gl>

The only form of the above sentence must be:

<gl>
\gll ma' gis-wissugwatige-w
NEG can-cook.1-NEG
\trans I cannot cook at this time
</gl>

<gl>
\gll mu gis-wissugwatige-w
can-cook.1-NEG
\trans I am unable to cook (something is preventing me from cooking)
</gl>

Thus it is seen that ''ma' '' comes before the verb, now making the sentence grammatical.

''ma' '' always precedes the future tense AND when the ''gis'' prefix is attached to the verb conjugated in the present for example:

<gl>
\gll ma' gis-amalga-w-g
NEG can-dance-NEG-3
\trans s/he cannot dance
</gl>

There are some expressions that always take the negative form of the verb such as ''me menga'' (not yet) and ''mowen'' (nobody) that take the negative form of the verb: (examples from [http://www.mikmaqonline.org/ Mi'gmaq Online Dictionary])

<gl>
\gll me' mnaq newt ajiegw
NEG yet one time-NEG-3
\trans it is not one o’clock yet
</gl>

<gl>
\gll mu-wen mijji-gw
NEG-who eat-NEG-3
\trans no one is eating
</gl>

<gl>
\gll mu goqwei etn-u-g
no thing be-NEG-3
\trans there is nothing there
</gl>

Below is a list of common particles after which the negated form is used. This list is not complete but these are the most common forms.

{| class="wikitable"
! Particle || When used || Translation
|-
| ''mu''
| before negated present and past
| not
|-
| ''mutt''
| before negated imperative
| do not
|-
| '''lpa mu''
| before negated present and past
| not even
|-
| ''mu wen''
| before negated present, past and future
| no one/nobody
|-
| ''mu goqwei'''
| before negated present, past and future
| nothing
|-
| ''me' mnaq''
| before negated verb
| not yet
|-
| ''ma' ''
| before negated future verb and preverb ''gis'' (can)
| not
|-
|}

''moqwa' goqwei'' is also spelled ''mu goqwei'' and a variant of this is ''mu'' + negated verb + ''goqwei'' when used in object position. It is inanimate. As in the following example:

<gl>
\gll mu malqutm-u goqwei
NEG eat.1>0-NEG what
\trans I eat nothing
</gl>

== Negative Concord ==
As can be seen above, Mi'gmaq is a negative concord language. Negative concord is where "double or multiple negative[s] [do] not express an affirmative but a negative" (van der Wouden & Zwarts, 1992). This is similar to French ''Je n'ai vue personne'' 'I have seen nobody' where both the ''ne'' and ''personne'' are both negative but the resulting sentence is negative, rather than each cancelling the other out resulting in a affirmative sentence, i.e. 'I have seen someone'. Mi'gmaq has negation marked in two places with both negative particles, i.e. ''mu'' & ''ma'', and a negative conjugation of the verb, i.e. with ''-u'' or ''-w'' added. Compare examples <glr id="1"/> and <glr id="2"/>.

<gl id="1">
\gll 'lpa'tuj eig'-p
boy be.there.PST-SG
\trans the boy was there
</gl>

<gl id="2">
\gll 'lpa'tuj mu eimu-g-u-p
boy NEG be.there-PST-NEG-SG
\trans the boy was not there
</gl>

= Word Order =
The negative particle (or possibly affix) ''mu'' always appears before the verb it negates. Although words can intervene between ''mu'' and the verb it negates, ''mu'' must always precede the verb.

<gl>
\gll Mali mu amal-gag-u-p
Mali NEG dance-PAST-NEG-SG
\trans Mali did not dance
</gl>

<gl>
\gll mu Mali amal-gag-u-p
NEG Mali dance-PAST-NEG-SG
\trans Mali did not dance
</gl>

Placement of ''mu'' post-verbally results in ungrammaticality, as illustrated below.

<gl>
\gll 'lpa'tuj mu eimug-u-p
boy NEG be.there.PST-NEG-SG
\trans the boy was not there
</gl>

Acceptable word orders:
*mu eimugup 'lpa'tuj
*mu 'lpa'tuj eimugup

Unacceptable word orders:
* *eimugup 'lpa'tuj mu
* *eimugup mu 'lpa'tuj
* *'lpa'tuj eimugup mu

Furthermore, with regards to word order, it appears that negation must come right before the constituent it negates. Here is an example sentence without negation:

<gl>
\gll ula na 'lpa'tuj ta'n egitg'p wi'gatign
this DEM boy that read.PST book
\trans this is the boy that read the book
</gl>

If we want to negate the first clause, as to say "This is '''not''' the boy that read the book", negation must directly precede 'boy'.

<gl>
\gll ula na mu 'lpa'tuj ta'n egitg'p wi'gatign
this DEM NEG boy that read.PST book
\trans this is not the boy that read the book
</gl>

The following word orders for negation in the first clause are impossible: *TO CHECK
* *ula na 'lpa'tuj mu...
* *ula mu na 'lpa'tuj...
* *mu ula na 'lpa'tuj...

If we want to negate the second clause, as to say "This is the boy that did '''not''' read the book", the word order may be varied, as long as negation comes before the verb (as discussed previously).

== Scope of Negation ==
As stated above, ''mu'' always comes before the verb. There may be particles that intrude between ''mu'' and the negated verb, but as long as ''mu'' comes before the negated verb, the structure is grammatical. [http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED136614.pdf Micmac Grammar, 1976] Sometimes the meaning of the sentence can change depending on the position of ''mu''.

<gl>
\gll 'gjitm Mali mu amal-gag-u-p
possible Mali NEG dance-PST-NEG-SG
\trans it is true that Mali did not dance
</gl>

*CHECK MORE

We would also expect phrases with adverb-like particles translatable as "it is possible" or "it is true" or "it is obvious" would also vary regarding negation.

=Language change and negation=
Often I was not able to elicit both the dual and plural forms of a verb. There are many times when I could only elicit the dual form, or times when the dual and plural forms were the same. It has been noted by our consultants that younger speakers are not using the plural forms but are using the dual form to mean both dual and plural. This seems be a language change happening currently in the speech community where the younger generation is leading the change. As noted in the paradigm above for 'eat' in the negated present tense, both dual and plural forms are the same. Here it seems that the plural form is used for both dual and plural meanings. This would strongly suggest a change happening in the speech community.

=References=
Clark, Jeremiah S. "A Dictionary of the Micmac Language." Rand's Micmac Dictionary. Charlottetown, PEI: The Patriot Publishing Company, 1902. Print.

Delisle, Gill L., and Manny L. Metallic. Micmac Teaching Grammar. Ecowi, QC: Thunderbird Press, 1976. Print.

L'Abbe Maillard, M. Grammaire De La Langue Mikmaque. New York: Presse Cramoisy de Jean-Marie Shea, 1864. Print.

Metallic, Janine. "Mi'gmaq Elicitation Session for Field Methods of Linguistics." Ed. Class, Carol Little and LING415. Montreal, QC: n/a, 2011. Print.

Payne, Thomas Edward. Describing Morphosyntax: a Guide for Field Linguists. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge UP, 2008. Print.

Paul-Martin, Patsy. "Mi'kmaq Verb Conjugation." Ed. Orthography, Mi'kmaq Talking Posters Smith/Francis. Truto, NS: Eastern Woodland Print Communications, 2011. Print.

Proulx, Paul. "Proto-Algonquian Verb Inflection." Studies in Native American Languages 15.2 (1990): 100-45. Print.

van der Wouden, Ton, and Frans Zwarts. "Negative Concord." D. Gilbers and S. Looyenga (eds), Language and Cognition 2. Yearbook 1992 Linguistic Theory and Knowledge Representation of the University of Groningen (1992): 317-31. Print.

Negation

2014-08-19T13:34:50Z

Carol: /* Future Tense */

=Introduction=
Negation is the process of turning affirmative statements into the opposite form. For example, the negative equivalent of affirmative sentence, ''I am eating'' is ''I am not eating''. In English there are a few processes at work. ''not'' must always come with an auxiliary verb like the verb 'to have' and 'to be'. In Mi'gmaq, with its extremely detailed and expansive verb conjugations in the present, it is not surprising that the negated conjugation of verbs is just as detailed and expansive as they are in the affirmative.

To start off any commentary on negation, it seems fitting to start of with the word "no" which is ''moqwa'' in Mi'gmaq. (The opposite of this is ''e'e'' , meaning "yes".) Negation in Mi'gmaq is similar to that of Obijwe in that there is both an affix that occurs between the verb and the person marker and a word that comes before the verb denoting negation. See [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ojibwe_grammar#Verbs Verb Conjugation in Ojibwe]. The Mi'gmaq negated affix is ''w'' or ''u'' which is very closely related to the Proto-Algonquian form for negation which is is ''*-w'' ( [http://kuscholarworks.ku.edu/dspace/bitstream/1808/440/1/ling.wp.v15.n2.paper6.pdf Proulx, 1990] ). ''w'' or ''u'' are very closely related phonetically since ''w'' is the semivowel corresponding to the vowel ''u''. Bear in mind that during the elicitation sessions, sometimes it was unsure whether to use ''w'' or ''u''.

Negation in Mi'gmaq consists of adding ''mu'' or ''ma'' then the verb conjugated in the negated verb form. After ''mu'' or ''ma'' the verb must always contain a negative particle. We must think of these two things as inseparable. ''mu'' always comes before the negative conjugated verb in the present or past, and ''ma'' always comes before future or if the prefix ''gis'' ('can', 'to be able to') is attached to the verb. All other prefixes abide by the rules ''mu'' before present or past and ''ma'' before future. There are other particles that take the negated form of the verb, but it is obvious that these particles express a negated idea.

Please note as well that in some of the studies on Mi'gmaq and Algonquian languages the term 'nonaffirmative' is used to describe the negated form. For consistency in this report, I will use the term 'negated' to indicate the form of the verb which is the opposite of affirmative. 'Nonaffirmative' and 'negated' however refer to the same process of negation.

= Conjugation of the Negated Verb =
I have selected the verb ''mijji'' (to eat). Please note that some resources spell this like ''mijji'' where other spell it ''miji'' ([http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED136614.pdf Micmac Teaching Grammar, 1976]). I have selected the spelling from [http://www.mikmaqonline.org/servlet/dictionaryFrameSet.html?arg0=mijjit&method=searchFromMikmaq the Migmaq talking dictionary]. It is also important to note that the Micmac Teaching Grammar uses an orthography that is different of all other orthographies used with Mi'gmaq. I will indicate which terms they are and give the Listuguj equivalent orthographical manner of writing them.

The simplified formula for the conjugation in the negated form: the base form + ''u'' or ''w'' + person ending ([http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED136614.pdf Micmac Teaching Grammar, 1976])
The base form for intransitive verbs is always the verb in the first person singular. For example I eat is ''mijji''. Now to create the second person singular we add the ending -''n'' denoting second person singular and get the form ''mijjin''. For another type of verb (henceforth referred to as the ''a'' verbs) we take the base form ''amalga-'' and add -''n'' to get ''amalgan'' (you dance) and to get the first person singular we add -''i''. Please note that it has been hypothesized that there are at least eleven different conjugations. We will only be dealing with a couple here. Because of reasons of time limitation, I was not able to elicit all eleven types but when there is a difference in conjugation, that will be noted. Note that in the plural the ''u'' or ''w'' comes after ''-ulti-''. This could be due the the fact that ''-ulti-'' is the plural affix that attaches to the base form of the verb and does not convey anything about the tense of the verb, rather it is used to denote that the verb is plural. Thus the ''u'' or ''w'' comes right before the tense marker which is always at the end of the verb. For the first person singular in present there is a null tense marker at the end of some verbs (for example the ''-i'' verbs) thus the negative marker is at the end.

== Present Tense ==
First is a comparison of the affirmative and negated paradigms of the verb ''mijji'' ('eat').

{| class="wikitable"
|+ mijji- 'eat'
|-
! scope="col" colspan="2"| ↓person / number→
! scope="col" | SG
! scope="col" | DU
! scope="col" | PL
|-
! scope="row" rowspan="2"| 1
! scope="row"| 13
| rowspan="2" | mijji
|mijjieg
|mijjultieg
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| mijji'gw
| mijjulti'gw
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2" | 2
| mijjin
| mijjioq
| mijjultioq
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2"| 3
| mijjit
| mijjijig
| mijjultijig
|-
|}

{| class="wikitable"
|+ mu mijji- 'not eat'
|-
! scope="col" colspan="2"| ↓person / number→
! scope="col" | SG
! scope="col" | DU
! scope="col" | PL
|-
! scope="row" rowspan="2"| 1
! scope="row"| 13
| rowspan="2" | mu mijjiw
| mu mijjiweg
| mu mijjultiweg
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| mu mijjigw
| mu mijjultigw
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2" | 2
| mu mijjiun
| mu mijjiwoq
| mu mijjultiwoq
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2"| 3
| mu mijjigw
| mu mijji'gw
| mu mijjulti'gw
|-
|}

The word ''mu'' signifies negation. When ''mu'' is in front of the verb, the verb must also be conjugated in the negative form. In the above table we see the intrusion of the sound ''u'', ''ew'' or ''w''. The following table illustrates the endings for the present negative tense, keeping in mind ''mu'' must ALWAYS come right before the negated verb. When ''mu'' precedes a verb it must ALWAYS be in the negated form.

Below is a table that summarizes the VAI -i stem negative person endings in present conjugation. Inanimate [IN] conjugation was taken from the Micmac Grammar (1976, pg 155).

{| class="wikitable"
|+ VAI -i stem negative present person endings
|-
! scope="col" colspan="2"| ↓person / number→
! scope="col" | SG
! scope="col" | DU
! scope="col" | PL
|-
! scope="row" rowspan="2"| 1
! scope="row"| 13
| rowspan="2" |-u
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2" | 2
| -
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2"| 3.AN
| -
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2"| 3.IN
| -
| -
| -
|-
|}

The forms for the first person dual and plural in the exclusive and inclusive forms are the same. As shown by other data, the dual form seems to be in the process of disappearing. This is one such example where the dual form does not exist for the plural first person. Some younger speakers do not use the dual form at all so it is not surprising that we find a gap in the dual form here. All this is according to the speaker but if we followed the pattern of the previous forms we would expect the dual form for the inclusive and exclusive first person to be ''-ieweg''. "When the verb is negated, then the -g third person is ALWAYS found" (Micmac Grammar, 1976 pg 93).

Below is a comparison of different verbs to give an idea of how to conjugate different types of verbs in the negated form. All forms are conjugated in the present singular third person animate. The form of -''elie-'' was taken from Micmac Grammar (pg 155). For more detail about these forms see [[VAI]].

{| class="wikitable"
! VAI stem || Base Form || Gloss || Affirmative || Gloss || Negated || Gloss
|-
| -i
| mijji-
| eat
| mijjit
| s/he eats
| mu mijjigw
| s/he does not eat
|-
| -a
| amalga-
| dance
| amalgat
| s/he dances
| mu amalgagw
| s/he does not dance
|-
| -a'si
| ala'si-
| go around
| ala'sit
| s/he goes around
| mu ala'sigw
| s/he does not go around
|-
| -e
| elie-
| go
| eliet
| s/he goes
| mu eliegw
| s/he does not go
|-
|}

For verb conjugations in the affirmative please see [http://firstnationhelp.com/ali/posters/pdf/verb_conjugation.pdf Mi'kmaq Verb Conjugation]. As you can see, this site uses the verb ''mijisi'' meaning 'to eat'. In Listuguj this is not used as the word for to eat because it sounds too close for the verb ''mejisi'' 'to excrete'.

=== Transitive ===
Below is the conjugation in present of a transitive verb that takes an inanimate object.

{| class="wikitable" style="text-align:center"
|+ VTI Conjugation Class 1: -m class
|-
! scope="col" | ↓subject / object→
! scope="col" | 0SG
! scope="col" | 0PL
|-
! scope="row" | 1
| malqutm
| malqutmann
|-
! scope="row" | 13
| malqutmeg
| malqutmegl
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| malqutmu'g
| malqutmu'gul
|-
! scope="row" | 2
| malqutmn
| malqutmnn
|-
! scope="row" | 2PL
| malqutmoq
| malqutmoqol
|-
! scope="row" | 3
| malqutmeg
| malqutmegl
|-
! scope="row" | 3PL
| malqutmi'tij
| malqutmi'titl
|}

{| class="wikitable" style="text-align:center"
|+ VTI Negative Conjugation Class 1: -m class
|-
! scope="col" | ↓subject / object→
! scope="col" | 0SG
! scope="col" | 0PL
|-
! scope="row" | 1
| mu malqutmu
| mu malqutmuann
|-
! scope="row" | 13
| mu malqutmueg
| mu malqutmuegl
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| mu malqutmugg
| mu malqutmuggul
|-
! scope="row" | 2
| mu malqutmu'n
| mu malqutmu'nn
|-
! scope="row" | 2PL
| mu malqutmuoq
| mu malqutmuoqol
|-
! scope="row" | 3
| mu malqutmug
| mu malqutmugul
|-
! scope="row" | 3PL
| mu malqutmi'tigw
| mu malqutmi'tigul
|-
|}

{| class="wikitable" style="text-align:center"
|+ VTI Negative Conjugation Class 1: -m class
|-
! scope="col" | ↓subject / object→
! scope="col" | 0SG
! scope="col" | 0PL
|-
! scope="row" | 1
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 13
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 12
|
|
|-
! scope="row" | 2
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 2PL
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 3
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 3PL
| -
| -
|-
|}

== Imperative ==
Here is the formation of the affirmative imperative:
{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijji-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 2 Second person
| mijji
| mijjigw
| mijjultigw
|-
|}

Now we compare it to the negated:
{| class="wikitable"
! ''mutt mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 2 Second person
| mutt mijjiw
| mutt mijjinew
| mutt mijjultinew
|-
|}

== Past Tense ==
Again for the past we compare the past and the negated past.

{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| mijjiap
| mijjieg'p
| mijjultieg'p
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| mijji'gup
| mijjulti'gup
|-
| 2 Second person
| mijjit'p
| mijjioqop
| mijjultioqop
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| mijjip
| mijjipnig
| mijjultipnig
|}

Now let us look at the negated forms.

{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| mu mijjiwap
| mu mijjiweg'p
| mu mijjultiweg'p
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| mu mijjiwgup
| mu mijjultiwgup/mijjultiggup
|-
| 2 Second person
| mu mijjiwt'p
| mu mijjiwoqop
| mu mijjultiwoqop
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| mu mijjigup
| mu mijjigupnig
| mu mijjultigupnig
|}

Thus this would be the conjugation of the negated form:

{| class="wikitable"
! Negated Past||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| -
| -
| -
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| -
| -
|-
| 2 Second person
| -
| -
| -
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| -
|
|
|}

For the third person the -''ug'p'' can change to -''weg'p'' for example:

<gl>
\gll Mu ala'ti-we-g'p
not go-NEG-SG.PAST
\trans She didn't go
</gl>

== Future Tense ==
First let us compare the affirmative tense for eat:

{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| mijjit's/mijjia's(List)
| mijjitesnen
| mijjultitesnen
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| mijjitesnu
| mijjultitesnu
|-
| 2 Second person
| mijjit'sg
| mijjitoqs'p
| mijjultitoqs'p
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| mijjitew
| mijjitaq
| mijjultitaq
|}

We compare the future affirmative with the negated below:

{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| ma' mijjiw
| ma' mijjiweg
| ma' mijjultiweg
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| ma' mijjigw
| ma' mijjultigw
|-
| 2 Second person
| ma' mijjiun
| ma' mijjiwoq
| ma' mijjultiwoq
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| ma' mijjigw
| ma' mijji'gw
| ma' mijjulti'gw
|}
NOTE: In the future the ''mu'' changes to ''ma' '' !! Like ''mu'', ''ma'' must always come before the verb conjugated in the negative future.
The correspondent was not able to produce a dual form in the future.

Now here is a paradigm of the negated endings in the future.

{| class="wikitable"
! Negated Future||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| -
| -
| -
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
|
| -
| -
|-
| 2 Second person
| -
|
|
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
|
|
|
|}

As you may have noticed the future tense is easy! The verbs take the same endings as the negated present tense but the ''mu'' is replaced with ''ma'' thus indicating future.

== When negation is used ==

When the verb is negated there must always find a negative particle (like ''mu'' or ''ma''). If not the sentence is ungrammatical as shown below:

<gl>
\gll *gis-wissugwatige-w
can-cook.1-NEG
\trans I cannot cook (intended meaning)
</gl>

The only form of the above sentence must be:

<gl>
\gll ma' gis-wissugwatige-w
NEG can-cook.1-NEG
\trans I cannot cook at this time
</gl>

<gl>
\gll mu gis-wissugwatige-w
can-cook.1-NEG
\trans I am unable to cook (something is preventing me from cooking)
</gl>

Thus it is seen that ''ma' '' comes before the verb, now making the sentence grammatical.

''ma' '' always precedes the future tense AND when the ''gis'' prefix is attached to the verb conjugated in the present for example:

<gl>
\gll ma' gis-amalga-w-g
NEG can-dance-NEG-3
\trans s/he cannot dance
</gl>

There are some expressions that always take the negative form of the verb such as ''me menga'' (not yet) and ''mowen'' (nobody) that take the negative form of the verb: (examples from [http://www.mikmaqonline.org/ Mi'gmaq Online Dictionary])

<gl>
\gll me' mnaq newt ajiegw
NEG yet one time-NEG-3
\trans it is not one o’clock yet
</gl>

<gl>
\gll mu-wen mijji-gw
NEG-who eat-NEG-3
\trans no one is eating
</gl>

<gl>
\gll mu goqwei etn-u-g
no thing be-NEG-3
\trans there is nothing there
</gl>

Below is a list of common particles after which the negated form is used. This list is not complete but these are the most common forms.

{| class="wikitable"
! Particle || When used || Translation
|-
| ''mu''
| before negated present and past
| not
|-
| ''mutt''
| before negated imperative
| do not
|-
| '''lpa mu''
| before negated present and past
| not even
|-
| ''mu wen''
| before negated present, past and future
| no one/nobody
|-
| ''mu goqwei'''
| before negated present, past and future
| nothing
|-
| ''me' mnaq''
| before negated verb
| not yet
|-
| ''ma' ''
| before negated future verb and preverb ''gis'' (can)
| not
|-
|}

''moqwa' goqwei'' is also spelled ''mu goqwei'' and a variant of this is ''mu'' + negated verb + ''goqwei'' when used in object position. It is inanimate. As in the following example:

<gl>
\gll mu malqutm-u goqwei
NEG eat.1>0-NEG what
\trans I eat nothing
</gl>

== Negative Concord ==
As can be seen above, Mi'gmaq is a negative concord language. Negative concord is where "double or multiple negative[s] [do] not express an affirmative but a negative" (van der Wouden & Zwarts, 1992). This is similar to French ''Je n'ai vue personne'' 'I have seen nobody' where both the ''ne'' and ''personne'' are both negative but the resulting sentence is negative, rather than each cancelling the other out resulting in a affirmative sentence, i.e. 'I have seen someone'. Mi'gmaq has negation marked in two places with both negative particles, i.e. ''mu'' & ''ma'', and a negative conjugation of the verb, i.e. with ''-u'' or ''-w'' added. Compare examples <glr id="1"/> and <glr id="2"/>.

<gl id="1">
\gll 'lpa'tuj eig'-p
boy be.there.PST-SG
\trans the boy was there
</gl>

<gl id="2">
\gll 'lpa'tuj mu eimu-g-u-p
boy NEG be.there-PST-NEG-SG
\trans the boy was not there
</gl>

= Word Order =
The negative particle (or possibly affix) ''mu'' always appears before the verb it negates. Although words can intervene between ''mu'' and the verb it negates, ''mu'' must always precede the verb.

<gl>
\gll Mali mu amal-gag-u-p
Mali NEG dance-PAST-NEG-SG
\trans Mali did not dance
</gl>

<gl>
\gll mu Mali amal-gag-u-p
NEG Mali dance-PAST-NEG-SG
\trans Mali did not dance
</gl>

Placement of ''mu'' post-verbally results in ungrammaticality, as illustrated below.

<gl>
\gll 'lpa'tuj mu eimug-u-p
boy NEG be.there.PST-NEG-SG
\trans the boy was not there
</gl>

Acceptable word orders:
*mu eimugup 'lpa'tuj
*mu 'lpa'tuj eimugup

Unacceptable word orders:
* *eimugup 'lpa'tuj mu
* *eimugup mu 'lpa'tuj
* *'lpa'tuj eimugup mu

Furthermore, with regards to word order, it appears that negation must come right before the constituent it negates. Here is an example sentence without negation:

<gl>
\gll ula na 'lpa'tuj ta'n egitg'p wi'gatign
this DEM boy that read.PST book
\trans this is the boy that read the book
</gl>

If we want to negate the first clause, as to say "This is '''not''' the boy that read the book", negation must directly precede 'boy'.

<gl>
\gll ula na mu 'lpa'tuj ta'n egitg'p wi'gatign
this DEM NEG boy that read.PST book
\trans this is not the boy that read the book
</gl>

The following word orders for negation in the first clause are impossible: *TO CHECK
* *ula na 'lpa'tuj mu...
* *ula mu na 'lpa'tuj...
* *mu ula na 'lpa'tuj...

If we want to negate the second clause, as to say "This is the boy that did '''not''' read the book", the word order may be varied, as long as negation comes before the verb (as discussed previously).

== Scope of Negation ==
As stated above, ''mu'' always comes before the verb. There may be particles that intrude between ''mu'' and the negated verb, but as long as ''mu'' comes before the negated verb, the structure is grammatical. [http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED136614.pdf Micmac Grammar, 1976] Sometimes the meaning of the sentence can change depending on the position of ''mu''.

<gl>
\gll 'gjitm Mali mu amal-gag-u-p
possible Mali NEG dance-PST-NEG-SG
\trans it is true that Mali did not dance
</gl>

*CHECK MORE

We would also expect phrases with adverb-like particles translatable as "it is possible" or "it is true" or "it is obvious" would also vary regarding negation.

=Language change and negation=
Often I was not able to elicit both the dual and plural forms of a verb. There are many times when I could only elicit the dual form, or times when the dual and plural forms were the same. It has been noted by our consultants that younger speakers are not using the plural forms but are using the dual form to mean both dual and plural. This seems be a language change happening currently in the speech community where the younger generation is leading the change. As noted in the paradigm above for 'eat' in the negated present tense, both dual and plural forms are the same. Here it seems that the plural form is used for both dual and plural meanings. This would strongly suggest a change happening in the speech community.

=References=
Clark, Jeremiah S. "A Dictionary of the Micmac Language." Rand's Micmac Dictionary. Charlottetown, PEI: The Patriot Publishing Company, 1902. Print.

Delisle, Gill L., and Manny L. Metallic. Micmac Teaching Grammar. Ecowi, QC: Thunderbird Press, 1976. Print.

L'Abbe Maillard, M. Grammaire De La Langue Mikmaque. New York: Presse Cramoisy de Jean-Marie Shea, 1864. Print.

Metallic, Janine. "Mi'gmaq Elicitation Session for Field Methods of Linguistics." Ed. Class, Carol Little and LING415. Montreal, QC: n/a, 2011. Print.

Payne, Thomas Edward. Describing Morphosyntax: a Guide for Field Linguists. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge UP, 2008. Print.

Paul-Martin, Patsy. "Mi'kmaq Verb Conjugation." Ed. Orthography, Mi'kmaq Talking Posters Smith/Francis. Truto, NS: Eastern Woodland Print Communications, 2011. Print.

Proulx, Paul. "Proto-Algonquian Verb Inflection." Studies in Native American Languages 15.2 (1990): 100-45. Print.

van der Wouden, Ton, and Frans Zwarts. "Negative Concord." D. Gilbers and S. Looyenga (eds), Language and Cognition 2. Yearbook 1992 Linguistic Theory and Knowledge Representation of the University of Groningen (1992): 317-31. Print.

Negation

2014-08-11T18:41:51Z

Carol: /* Past Tense */

=Introduction=
Negation is the process of turning affirmative statements into the opposite form. For example, the negative equivalent of affirmative sentence, ''I am eating'' is ''I am not eating''. In English there are a few processes at work. ''not'' must always come with an auxiliary verb like the verb 'to have' and 'to be'. In Mi'gmaq, with its extremely detailed and expansive verb conjugations in the present, it is not surprising that the negated conjugation of verbs is just as detailed and expansive as they are in the affirmative.

To start off any commentary on negation, it seems fitting to start of with the word "no" which is ''moqwa'' in Mi'gmaq. (The opposite of this is ''e'e'' , meaning "yes".) Negation in Mi'gmaq is similar to that of Obijwe in that there is both an affix that occurs between the verb and the person marker and a word that comes before the verb denoting negation. See [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ojibwe_grammar#Verbs Verb Conjugation in Ojibwe]. The Mi'gmaq negated affix is ''w'' or ''u'' which is very closely related to the Proto-Algonquian form for negation which is is ''*-w'' ( [http://kuscholarworks.ku.edu/dspace/bitstream/1808/440/1/ling.wp.v15.n2.paper6.pdf Proulx, 1990] ). ''w'' or ''u'' are very closely related phonetically since ''w'' is the semivowel corresponding to the vowel ''u''. Bear in mind that during the elicitation sessions, sometimes it was unsure whether to use ''w'' or ''u''.

Negation in Mi'gmaq consists of adding ''mu'' or ''ma'' then the verb conjugated in the negated verb form. After ''mu'' or ''ma'' the verb must always contain a negative particle. We must think of these two things as inseparable. ''mu'' always comes before the negative conjugated verb in the present or past, and ''ma'' always comes before future or if the prefix ''gis'' ('can', 'to be able to') is attached to the verb. All other prefixes abide by the rules ''mu'' before present or past and ''ma'' before future. There are other particles that take the negated form of the verb, but it is obvious that these particles express a negated idea.

Please note as well that in some of the studies on Mi'gmaq and Algonquian languages the term 'nonaffirmative' is used to describe the negated form. For consistency in this report, I will use the term 'negated' to indicate the form of the verb which is the opposite of affirmative. 'Nonaffirmative' and 'negated' however refer to the same process of negation.

= Conjugation of the Negated Verb =
I have selected the verb ''mijji'' (to eat). Please note that some resources spell this like ''mijji'' where other spell it ''miji'' ([http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED136614.pdf Micmac Teaching Grammar, 1976]). I have selected the spelling from [http://www.mikmaqonline.org/servlet/dictionaryFrameSet.html?arg0=mijjit&method=searchFromMikmaq the Migmaq talking dictionary]. It is also important to note that the Micmac Teaching Grammar uses an orthography that is different of all other orthographies used with Mi'gmaq. I will indicate which terms they are and give the Listuguj equivalent orthographical manner of writing them.

The simplified formula for the conjugation in the negated form: the base form + ''u'' or ''w'' + person ending ([http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED136614.pdf Micmac Teaching Grammar, 1976])
The base form for intransitive verbs is always the verb in the first person singular. For example I eat is ''mijji''. Now to create the second person singular we add the ending -''n'' denoting second person singular and get the form ''mijjin''. For another type of verb (henceforth referred to as the ''a'' verbs) we take the base form ''amalga-'' and add -''n'' to get ''amalgan'' (you dance) and to get the first person singular we add -''i''. Please note that it has been hypothesized that there are at least eleven different conjugations. We will only be dealing with a couple here. Because of reasons of time limitation, I was not able to elicit all eleven types but when there is a difference in conjugation, that will be noted. Note that in the plural the ''u'' or ''w'' comes after ''-ulti-''. This could be due the the fact that ''-ulti-'' is the plural affix that attaches to the base form of the verb and does not convey anything about the tense of the verb, rather it is used to denote that the verb is plural. Thus the ''u'' or ''w'' comes right before the tense marker which is always at the end of the verb. For the first person singular in present there is a null tense marker at the end of some verbs (for example the ''-i'' verbs) thus the negative marker is at the end.

== Present Tense ==
First is a comparison of the affirmative and negated paradigms of the verb ''mijji'' ('eat').

{| class="wikitable"
|+ mijji- 'eat'
|-
! scope="col" colspan="2"| ↓person / number→
! scope="col" | SG
! scope="col" | DU
! scope="col" | PL
|-
! scope="row" rowspan="2"| 1
! scope="row"| 13
| rowspan="2" | mijji
|mijjieg
|mijjultieg
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| mijji'gw
| mijjulti'gw
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2" | 2
| mijjin
| mijjioq
| mijjultioq
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2"| 3
| mijjit
| mijjijig
| mijjultijig
|-
|}

{| class="wikitable"
|+ mu mijji- 'not eat'
|-
! scope="col" colspan="2"| ↓person / number→
! scope="col" | SG
! scope="col" | DU
! scope="col" | PL
|-
! scope="row" rowspan="2"| 1
! scope="row"| 13
| rowspan="2" | mu mijjiw
| mu mijjiweg
| mu mijjultiweg
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| mu mijjigw
| mu mijjultigw
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2" | 2
| mu mijjiun
| mu mijjiwoq
| mu mijjultiwoq
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2"| 3
| mu mijjigw
| mu mijji'gw
| mu mijjulti'gw
|-
|}

The word ''mu'' signifies negation. When ''mu'' is in front of the verb, the verb must also be conjugated in the negative form. In the above table we see the intrusion of the sound ''u'', ''ew'' or ''w''. The following table illustrates the endings for the present negative tense, keeping in mind ''mu'' must ALWAYS come right before the negated verb. When ''mu'' precedes a verb it must ALWAYS be in the negated form.

Below is a table that summarizes the VAI -i stem negative person endings in present conjugation. Inanimate [IN] conjugation was taken from the Micmac Grammar (1976, pg 155).

{| class="wikitable"
|+ VAI -i stem negative present person endings
|-
! scope="col" colspan="2"| ↓person / number→
! scope="col" | SG
! scope="col" | DU
! scope="col" | PL
|-
! scope="row" rowspan="2"| 1
! scope="row"| 13
| rowspan="2" |-u
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2" | 2
| -
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2"| 3.AN
| -
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2"| 3.IN
| -
| -
| -
|-
|}

The forms for the first person dual and plural in the exclusive and inclusive forms are the same. As shown by other data, the dual form seems to be in the process of disappearing. This is one such example where the dual form does not exist for the plural first person. Some younger speakers do not use the dual form at all so it is not surprising that we find a gap in the dual form here. All this is according to the speaker but if we followed the pattern of the previous forms we would expect the dual form for the inclusive and exclusive first person to be ''-ieweg''. "When the verb is negated, then the -g third person is ALWAYS found" (Micmac Grammar, 1976 pg 93).

Below is a comparison of different verbs to give an idea of how to conjugate different types of verbs in the negated form. All forms are conjugated in the present singular third person animate. The form of -''elie-'' was taken from Micmac Grammar (pg 155). For more detail about these forms see [[VAI]].

{| class="wikitable"
! VAI stem || Base Form || Gloss || Affirmative || Gloss || Negated || Gloss
|-
| -i
| mijji-
| eat
| mijjit
| s/he eats
| mu mijjigw
| s/he does not eat
|-
| -a
| amalga-
| dance
| amalgat
| s/he dances
| mu amalgagw
| s/he does not dance
|-
| -a'si
| ala'si-
| go around
| ala'sit
| s/he goes around
| mu ala'sigw
| s/he does not go around
|-
| -e
| elie-
| go
| eliet
| s/he goes
| mu eliegw
| s/he does not go
|-
|}

For verb conjugations in the affirmative please see [http://firstnationhelp.com/ali/posters/pdf/verb_conjugation.pdf Mi'kmaq Verb Conjugation]. As you can see, this site uses the verb ''mijisi'' meaning 'to eat'. In Listuguj this is not used as the word for to eat because it sounds too close for the verb ''mejisi'' 'to excrete'.

=== Transitive ===
Below is the conjugation in present of a transitive verb that takes an inanimate object.

{| class="wikitable" style="text-align:center"
|+ VTI Conjugation Class 1: -m class
|-
! scope="col" | ↓subject / object→
! scope="col" | 0SG
! scope="col" | 0PL
|-
! scope="row" | 1
| malqutm
| malqutmann
|-
! scope="row" | 13
| malqutmeg
| malqutmegl
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| malqutmu'g
| malqutmu'gul
|-
! scope="row" | 2
| malqutmn
| malqutmnn
|-
! scope="row" | 2PL
| malqutmoq
| malqutmoqol
|-
! scope="row" | 3
| malqutmeg
| malqutmegl
|-
! scope="row" | 3PL
| malqutmi'tij
| malqutmi'titl
|}

{| class="wikitable" style="text-align:center"
|+ VTI Negative Conjugation Class 1: -m class
|-
! scope="col" | ↓subject / object→
! scope="col" | 0SG
! scope="col" | 0PL
|-
! scope="row" | 1
| mu malqutmu
| mu malqutmuann
|-
! scope="row" | 13
| mu malqutmueg
| mu malqutmuegl
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| mu malqutmugg
| mu malqutmuggul
|-
! scope="row" | 2
| mu malqutmu'n
| mu malqutmu'nn
|-
! scope="row" | 2PL
| mu malqutmuoq
| mu malqutmuoqol
|-
! scope="row" | 3
| mu malqutmug
| mu malqutmugul
|-
! scope="row" | 3PL
| mu malqutmi'tigw
| mu malqutmi'tigul
|-
|}

{| class="wikitable" style="text-align:center"
|+ VTI Negative Conjugation Class 1: -m class
|-
! scope="col" | ↓subject / object→
! scope="col" | 0SG
! scope="col" | 0PL
|-
! scope="row" | 1
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 13
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 12
|
|
|-
! scope="row" | 2
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 2PL
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 3
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 3PL
| -
| -
|-
|}

== Imperative ==
Here is the formation of the affirmative imperative:
{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijji-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 2 Second person
| mijji
| mijjigw
| mijjultigw
|-
|}

Now we compare it to the negated:
{| class="wikitable"
! ''mutt mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 2 Second person
| mutt mijjiw
| mutt mijjinew
| mutt mijjultinew
|-
|}

== Past Tense ==
Again for the past we compare the past and the negated past.

{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| mijjiap
| mijjieg'p
| mijjultieg'p
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| mijji'gup
| mijjulti'gup
|-
| 2 Second person
| mijjit'p
| mijjioqop
| mijjultioqop
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| mijjip
| mijjipnig
| mijjultipnig
|}

Now let us look at the negated forms.

{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| mu mijjiwap
| mu mijjiweg'p
| mu mijjultiweg'p
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| mu mijjiwgup
| mu mijjultiwgup/mijjultiggup
|-
| 2 Second person
| mu mijjiwt'p
| mu mijjiwoqop
| mu mijjultiwoqop
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| mu mijjigup
| mu mijjigupnig
| mu mijjultigupnig
|}

Thus this would be the conjugation of the negated form:

{| class="wikitable"
! Negated Past||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| -
| -
| -
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| -
| -
|-
| 2 Second person
| -
| -
| -
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| -
|
|
|}

For the third person the -''ug'p'' can change to -''weg'p'' for example:

<gl>
\gll Mu ala'ti-we-g'p
not go-NEG-SG.PAST
\trans She didn't go
</gl>

== Future Tense ==
First let us compare the affirmative tense for eat:

{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| mijjit's/mijjia's(List)
| mijjitesnen
| mijjultitesnen
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| mijjitesnu
| mijjultitesnu
|-
| 2 Second person
| mijjit'sg
| mijjitoqs'p
| mijjultitoqs'p
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| mijjitew
| mijjitaq
| mijjultitaq
|}
I was not able to elicit dual forms.

We compare the future affirmative with the negated below:

{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| ma' mijjiw
| ma' mijjiweg
| ma' mijjultiweg
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| ma' mijjigw
| ma' mijjultigw
|-
| 2 Second person
| ma' mijjiun
| ma' mijjiwoq
| ma' mijjultiwoq
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| ma' mijjigw
| ma' mijji'gw
| ma' mijjulti'gw
|}
NOTE: In the future the ''mu'' changes to ''ma' '' !! Like ''mu'', ''ma'' must always come before the verb conjugated in the negative future.
The correspondent was not able to produce a dual form in the future.

Now here is a paradigm of the negated endings in the future.

{| class="wikitable"
! Negated Future||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| -
| -
| -
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
|
| -
| -
|-
| 2 Second person
| -
|
|
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
|
|
|
|}

As you may have noticed the future tense is easy! The verbs take the same endings as the negated present tense but the ''mu'' is replaced with ''ma'' thus indicating future.

== When negation is used ==

When the verb is negated there must always find a negative particle (like ''mu'' or ''ma''). If not the sentence is ungrammatical as shown below:

<gl>
\gll *gis-wissugwatige-w
can-cook.1-NEG
\trans I cannot cook (intended meaning)
</gl>

The only form of the above sentence must be:

<gl>
\gll ma' gis-wissugwatige-w
NEG can-cook.1-NEG
\trans I cannot cook at this time
</gl>

<gl>
\gll mu gis-wissugwatige-w
can-cook.1-NEG
\trans I am unable to cook (something is preventing me from cooking)
</gl>

Thus it is seen that ''ma' '' comes before the verb, now making the sentence grammatical.

''ma' '' always precedes the future tense AND when the ''gis'' prefix is attached to the verb conjugated in the present for example:

<gl>
\gll ma' gis-amalga-w-g
NEG can-dance-NEG-3
\trans s/he cannot dance
</gl>

There are some expressions that always take the negative form of the verb such as ''me menga'' (not yet) and ''mowen'' (nobody) that take the negative form of the verb: (examples from [http://www.mikmaqonline.org/ Mi'gmaq Online Dictionary])

<gl>
\gll me' mnaq newt ajiegw
NEG yet one time-NEG-3
\trans it is not one o’clock yet
</gl>

<gl>
\gll mu-wen mijji-gw
NEG-who eat-NEG-3
\trans no one is eating
</gl>

<gl>
\gll mu goqwei etn-u-g
no thing be-NEG-3
\trans there is nothing there
</gl>

Below is a list of common particles after which the negated form is used. This list is not complete but these are the most common forms.

{| class="wikitable"
! Particle || When used || Translation
|-
| ''mu''
| before negated present and past
| not
|-
| ''mutt''
| before negated imperative
| do not
|-
| '''lpa mu''
| before negated present and past
| not even
|-
| ''mu wen''
| before negated present, past and future
| no one/nobody
|-
| ''mu goqwei'''
| before negated present, past and future
| nothing
|-
| ''me' mnaq''
| before negated verb
| not yet
|-
| ''ma' ''
| before negated future verb and preverb ''gis'' (can)
| not
|-
|}

''moqwa' goqwei'' is also spelled ''mu goqwei'' and a variant of this is ''mu'' + negated verb + ''goqwei'' when used in object position. It is inanimate. As in the following example:

<gl>
\gll mu malqutm-u goqwei
NEG eat.1>0-NEG what
\trans I eat nothing
</gl>

== Negative Concord ==
As can be seen above, Mi'gmaq is a negative concord language. Negative concord is where "double or multiple negative[s] [do] not express an affirmative but a negative" (van der Wouden & Zwarts, 1992). This is similar to French ''Je n'ai vue personne'' 'I have seen nobody' where both the ''ne'' and ''personne'' are both negative but the resulting sentence is negative, rather than each cancelling the other out resulting in a affirmative sentence, i.e. 'I have seen someone'. Mi'gmaq has negation marked in two places with both negative particles, i.e. ''mu'' & ''ma'', and a negative conjugation of the verb, i.e. with ''-u'' or ''-w'' added. Compare examples <glr id="1"/> and <glr id="2"/>.

<gl id="1">
\gll 'lpa'tuj eig'-p
boy be.there.PST-SG
\trans the boy was there
</gl>

<gl id="2">
\gll 'lpa'tuj mu eimu-g-u-p
boy NEG be.there-PST-NEG-SG
\trans the boy was not there
</gl>

= Word Order =
The negative particle (or possibly affix) ''mu'' always appears before the verb it negates. Although words can intervene between ''mu'' and the verb it negates, ''mu'' must always precede the verb.

<gl>
\gll Mali mu amal-gag-u-p
Mali NEG dance-PAST-NEG-SG
\trans Mali did not dance
</gl>

<gl>
\gll mu Mali amal-gag-u-p
NEG Mali dance-PAST-NEG-SG
\trans Mali did not dance
</gl>

Placement of ''mu'' post-verbally results in ungrammaticality, as illustrated below.

<gl>
\gll 'lpa'tuj mu eimug-u-p
boy NEG be.there.PST-NEG-SG
\trans the boy was not there
</gl>

Acceptable word orders:
*mu eimugup 'lpa'tuj
*mu 'lpa'tuj eimugup

Unacceptable word orders:
* *eimugup 'lpa'tuj mu
* *eimugup mu 'lpa'tuj
* *'lpa'tuj eimugup mu

Furthermore, with regards to word order, it appears that negation must come right before the constituent it negates. Here is an example sentence without negation:

<gl>
\gll ula na 'lpa'tuj ta'n egitg'p wi'gatign
this DEM boy that read.PST book
\trans this is the boy that read the book
</gl>

If we want to negate the first clause, as to say "This is '''not''' the boy that read the book", negation must directly precede 'boy'.

<gl>
\gll ula na mu 'lpa'tuj ta'n egitg'p wi'gatign
this DEM NEG boy that read.PST book
\trans this is not the boy that read the book
</gl>

The following word orders for negation in the first clause are impossible: *TO CHECK
* *ula na 'lpa'tuj mu...
* *ula mu na 'lpa'tuj...
* *mu ula na 'lpa'tuj...

If we want to negate the second clause, as to say "This is the boy that did '''not''' read the book", the word order may be varied, as long as negation comes before the verb (as discussed previously).

== Scope of Negation ==
As stated above, ''mu'' always comes before the verb. There may be particles that intrude between ''mu'' and the negated verb, but as long as ''mu'' comes before the negated verb, the structure is grammatical. [http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED136614.pdf Micmac Grammar, 1976] Sometimes the meaning of the sentence can change depending on the position of ''mu''.

<gl>
\gll 'gjitm Mali mu amal-gag-u-p
possible Mali NEG dance-PST-NEG-SG
\trans it is true that Mali did not dance
</gl>

*CHECK MORE

We would also expect phrases with adverb-like particles translatable as "it is possible" or "it is true" or "it is obvious" would also vary regarding negation.

=Language change and negation=
Often I was not able to elicit both the dual and plural forms of a verb. There are many times when I could only elicit the dual form, or times when the dual and plural forms were the same. It has been noted by our consultants that younger speakers are not using the plural forms but are using the dual form to mean both dual and plural. This seems be a language change happening currently in the speech community where the younger generation is leading the change. As noted in the paradigm above for 'eat' in the negated present tense, both dual and plural forms are the same. Here it seems that the plural form is used for both dual and plural meanings. This would strongly suggest a change happening in the speech community.

=References=
Clark, Jeremiah S. "A Dictionary of the Micmac Language." Rand's Micmac Dictionary. Charlottetown, PEI: The Patriot Publishing Company, 1902. Print.

Delisle, Gill L., and Manny L. Metallic. Micmac Teaching Grammar. Ecowi, QC: Thunderbird Press, 1976. Print.

L'Abbe Maillard, M. Grammaire De La Langue Mikmaque. New York: Presse Cramoisy de Jean-Marie Shea, 1864. Print.

Metallic, Janine. "Mi'gmaq Elicitation Session for Field Methods of Linguistics." Ed. Class, Carol Little and LING415. Montreal, QC: n/a, 2011. Print.

Payne, Thomas Edward. Describing Morphosyntax: a Guide for Field Linguists. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge UP, 2008. Print.

Paul-Martin, Patsy. "Mi'kmaq Verb Conjugation." Ed. Orthography, Mi'kmaq Talking Posters Smith/Francis. Truto, NS: Eastern Woodland Print Communications, 2011. Print.

Proulx, Paul. "Proto-Algonquian Verb Inflection." Studies in Native American Languages 15.2 (1990): 100-45. Print.

van der Wouden, Ton, and Frans Zwarts. "Negative Concord." D. Gilbers and S. Looyenga (eds), Language and Cognition 2. Yearbook 1992 Linguistic Theory and Knowledge Representation of the University of Groningen (1992): 317-31. Print.

Negation

2014-08-08T13:52:29Z

Carol: /* Scope of Negation */

=Introduction=
Negation is the process of turning affirmative statements into the opposite form. For example, the negative equivalent of affirmative sentence, ''I am eating'' is ''I am not eating''. In English there are a few processes at work. ''not'' must always come with an auxiliary verb like the verb 'to have' and 'to be'. In Mi'gmaq, with its extremely detailed and expansive verb conjugations in the present, it is not surprising that the negated conjugation of verbs is just as detailed and expansive as they are in the affirmative.

To start off any commentary on negation, it seems fitting to start of with the word "no" which is ''moqwa'' in Mi'gmaq. (The opposite of this is ''e'e'' , meaning "yes".) Negation in Mi'gmaq is similar to that of Obijwe in that there is both an affix that occurs between the verb and the person marker and a word that comes before the verb denoting negation. See [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ojibwe_grammar#Verbs Verb Conjugation in Ojibwe]. The Mi'gmaq negated affix is ''w'' or ''u'' which is very closely related to the Proto-Algonquian form for negation which is is ''*-w'' ( [http://kuscholarworks.ku.edu/dspace/bitstream/1808/440/1/ling.wp.v15.n2.paper6.pdf Proulx, 1990] ). ''w'' or ''u'' are very closely related phonetically since ''w'' is the semivowel corresponding to the vowel ''u''. Bear in mind that during the elicitation sessions, sometimes it was unsure whether to use ''w'' or ''u''.

Negation in Mi'gmaq consists of adding ''mu'' or ''ma'' then the verb conjugated in the negated verb form. After ''mu'' or ''ma'' the verb must always contain a negative particle. We must think of these two things as inseparable. ''mu'' always comes before the negative conjugated verb in the present or past, and ''ma'' always comes before future or if the prefix ''gis'' ('can', 'to be able to') is attached to the verb. All other prefixes abide by the rules ''mu'' before present or past and ''ma'' before future. There are other particles that take the negated form of the verb, but it is obvious that these particles express a negated idea.

Please note as well that in some of the studies on Mi'gmaq and Algonquian languages the term 'nonaffirmative' is used to describe the negated form. For consistency in this report, I will use the term 'negated' to indicate the form of the verb which is the opposite of affirmative. 'Nonaffirmative' and 'negated' however refer to the same process of negation.

= Conjugation of the Negated Verb =
I have selected the verb ''mijji'' (to eat). Please note that some resources spell this like ''mijji'' where other spell it ''miji'' ([http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED136614.pdf Micmac Teaching Grammar, 1976]). I have selected the spelling from [http://www.mikmaqonline.org/servlet/dictionaryFrameSet.html?arg0=mijjit&method=searchFromMikmaq the Migmaq talking dictionary]. It is also important to note that the Micmac Teaching Grammar uses an orthography that is different of all other orthographies used with Mi'gmaq. I will indicate which terms they are and give the Listuguj equivalent orthographical manner of writing them.

The simplified formula for the conjugation in the negated form: the base form + ''u'' or ''w'' + person ending ([http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED136614.pdf Micmac Teaching Grammar, 1976])
The base form for intransitive verbs is always the verb in the first person singular. For example I eat is ''mijji''. Now to create the second person singular we add the ending -''n'' denoting second person singular and get the form ''mijjin''. For another type of verb (henceforth referred to as the ''a'' verbs) we take the base form ''amalga-'' and add -''n'' to get ''amalgan'' (you dance) and to get the first person singular we add -''i''. Please note that it has been hypothesized that there are at least eleven different conjugations. We will only be dealing with a couple here. Because of reasons of time limitation, I was not able to elicit all eleven types but when there is a difference in conjugation, that will be noted. Note that in the plural the ''u'' or ''w'' comes after ''-ulti-''. This could be due the the fact that ''-ulti-'' is the plural affix that attaches to the base form of the verb and does not convey anything about the tense of the verb, rather it is used to denote that the verb is plural. Thus the ''u'' or ''w'' comes right before the tense marker which is always at the end of the verb. For the first person singular in present there is a null tense marker at the end of some verbs (for example the ''-i'' verbs) thus the negative marker is at the end.

== Present Tense ==
First is a comparison of the affirmative and negated paradigms of the verb ''mijji'' ('eat').

{| class="wikitable"
|+ mijji- 'eat'
|-
! scope="col" colspan="2"| ↓person / number→
! scope="col" | SG
! scope="col" | DU
! scope="col" | PL
|-
! scope="row" rowspan="2"| 1
! scope="row"| 13
| rowspan="2" | mijji
|mijjieg
|mijjultieg
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| mijji'gw
| mijjulti'gw
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2" | 2
| mijjin
| mijjioq
| mijjultioq
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2"| 3
| mijjit
| mijjijig
| mijjultijig
|-
|}

{| class="wikitable"
|+ mu mijji- 'not eat'
|-
! scope="col" colspan="2"| ↓person / number→
! scope="col" | SG
! scope="col" | DU
! scope="col" | PL
|-
! scope="row" rowspan="2"| 1
! scope="row"| 13
| rowspan="2" | mu mijjiw
| mu mijjiweg
| mu mijjultiweg
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| mu mijjigw
| mu mijjultigw
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2" | 2
| mu mijjiun
| mu mijjiwoq
| mu mijjultiwoq
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2"| 3
| mu mijjigw
| mu mijji'gw
| mu mijjulti'gw
|-
|}

The word ''mu'' signifies negation. When ''mu'' is in front of the verb, the verb must also be conjugated in the negative form. In the above table we see the intrusion of the sound ''u'', ''ew'' or ''w''. The following table illustrates the endings for the present negative tense, keeping in mind ''mu'' must ALWAYS come right before the negated verb. When ''mu'' precedes a verb it must ALWAYS be in the negated form.

Below is a table that summarizes the VAI -i stem negative person endings in present conjugation. Inanimate [IN] conjugation was taken from the Micmac Grammar (1976, pg 155).

{| class="wikitable"
|+ VAI -i stem negative present person endings
|-
! scope="col" colspan="2"| ↓person / number→
! scope="col" | SG
! scope="col" | DU
! scope="col" | PL
|-
! scope="row" rowspan="2"| 1
! scope="row"| 13
| rowspan="2" |-u
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2" | 2
| -
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2"| 3.AN
| -
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2"| 3.IN
| -
| -
| -
|-
|}

The forms for the first person dual and plural in the exclusive and inclusive forms are the same. As shown by other data, the dual form seems to be in the process of disappearing. This is one such example where the dual form does not exist for the plural first person. Some younger speakers do not use the dual form at all so it is not surprising that we find a gap in the dual form here. All this is according to the speaker but if we followed the pattern of the previous forms we would expect the dual form for the inclusive and exclusive first person to be ''-ieweg''. "When the verb is negated, then the -g third person is ALWAYS found" (Micmac Grammar, 1976 pg 93).

Below is a comparison of different verbs to give an idea of how to conjugate different types of verbs in the negated form. All forms are conjugated in the present singular third person animate. The form of -''elie-'' was taken from Micmac Grammar (pg 155). For more detail about these forms see [[VAI]].

{| class="wikitable"
! VAI stem || Base Form || Gloss || Affirmative || Gloss || Negated || Gloss
|-
| -i
| mijji-
| eat
| mijjit
| s/he eats
| mu mijjigw
| s/he does not eat
|-
| -a
| amalga-
| dance
| amalgat
| s/he dances
| mu amalgagw
| s/he does not dance
|-
| -a'si
| ala'si-
| go around
| ala'sit
| s/he goes around
| mu ala'sigw
| s/he does not go around
|-
| -e
| elie-
| go
| eliet
| s/he goes
| mu eliegw
| s/he does not go
|-
|}

For verb conjugations in the affirmative please see [http://firstnationhelp.com/ali/posters/pdf/verb_conjugation.pdf Mi'kmaq Verb Conjugation]. As you can see, this site uses the verb ''mijisi'' meaning 'to eat'. In Listuguj this is not used as the word for to eat because it sounds too close for the verb ''mejisi'' 'to excrete'.

=== Transitive ===
Below is the conjugation in present of a transitive verb that takes an inanimate object.

{| class="wikitable" style="text-align:center"
|+ VTI Conjugation Class 1: -m class
|-
! scope="col" | ↓subject / object→
! scope="col" | 0SG
! scope="col" | 0PL
|-
! scope="row" | 1
| malqutm
| malqutmann
|-
! scope="row" | 13
| malqutmeg
| malqutmegl
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| malqutmu'g
| malqutmu'gul
|-
! scope="row" | 2
| malqutmn
| malqutmnn
|-
! scope="row" | 2PL
| malqutmoq
| malqutmoqol
|-
! scope="row" | 3
| malqutmeg
| malqutmegl
|-
! scope="row" | 3PL
| malqutmi'tij
| malqutmi'titl
|}

{| class="wikitable" style="text-align:center"
|+ VTI Negative Conjugation Class 1: -m class
|-
! scope="col" | ↓subject / object→
! scope="col" | 0SG
! scope="col" | 0PL
|-
! scope="row" | 1
| mu malqutmu
| mu malqutmuann
|-
! scope="row" | 13
| mu malqutmueg
| mu malqutmuegl
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| mu malqutmugg
| mu malqutmuggul
|-
! scope="row" | 2
| mu malqutmu'n
| mu malqutmu'nn
|-
! scope="row" | 2PL
| mu malqutmuoq
| mu malqutmuoqol
|-
! scope="row" | 3
| mu malqutmug
| mu malqutmugul
|-
! scope="row" | 3PL
| mu malqutmi'tigw
| mu malqutmi'tigul
|-
|}

{| class="wikitable" style="text-align:center"
|+ VTI Negative Conjugation Class 1: -m class
|-
! scope="col" | ↓subject / object→
! scope="col" | 0SG
! scope="col" | 0PL
|-
! scope="row" | 1
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 13
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 12
|
|
|-
! scope="row" | 2
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 2PL
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 3
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 3PL
| -
| -
|-
|}

== Imperative ==
Here is the formation of the affirmative imperative:
{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijji-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 2 Second person
| mijji
| mijjigw
| mijjultigw
|-
|}

Now we compare it to the negated:
{| class="wikitable"
! ''mutt mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 2 Second person
| mutt mijjiw
| mutt mijjinew
| mutt mijjultinew
|-
|}

== Past Tense ==
Again for the past we compare the past and the negated past.

{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| mijjiap
| mijjieg'p
| mijjultieg'p
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| mijji'gup
| mijjulti'gup
|-
| 2 Second person
| mijjit'p
| mijjioqop
| mijjultioqop
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| mijjip
| mijjipni'g
| mijjultipni'g
|}

Now let us look at the negated forms.

{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| mu mijjiwap
| mu mijjiweg'p
| mu mijjultiweg'p
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| mu mijjiwgup
| mu mijjultiwgup/mijjultiggup
|-
| 2 Second person
| mu mijjiwt'p
| mu mijjiwoqop
| mu mijjultiwoqop
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| mu mijjigup
| mu mijjigupnig
| mu mijjultigupnig
|}

Thus this would be the conjugation of the negated form:

{| class="wikitable"
! Negated Past||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| -
| -
| -
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| -
| -
|-
| 2 Second person
| -
| -
| -
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| -
|
|
|}

For the third person the -''ug'p'' can change to -''weg'p'' for example:

<gl>
\gll Mu ala'ti-we-g'p
not go-NEG-SG.PAST
\trans She didn't go
</gl>

== Future Tense ==
First let us compare the affirmative tense for eat:

{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| mijjit's/mijjia's(List)
| mijjitesnen
| mijjultitesnen
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| mijjitesnu
| mijjultitesnu
|-
| 2 Second person
| mijjit'sg
| mijjitoqs'p
| mijjultitoqs'p
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| mijjitew
| mijjitaq
| mijjultitaq
|}
I was not able to elicit dual forms.

We compare the future affirmative with the negated below:

{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| ma' mijjiw
| ma' mijjiweg
| ma' mijjultiweg
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| ma' mijjigw
| ma' mijjultigw
|-
| 2 Second person
| ma' mijjiun
| ma' mijjiwoq
| ma' mijjultiwoq
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| ma' mijjigw
| ma' mijji'gw
| ma' mijjulti'gw
|}
NOTE: In the future the ''mu'' changes to ''ma' '' !! Like ''mu'', ''ma'' must always come before the verb conjugated in the negative future.
The correspondent was not able to produce a dual form in the future.

Now here is a paradigm of the negated endings in the future.

{| class="wikitable"
! Negated Future||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| -
| -
| -
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
|
| -
| -
|-
| 2 Second person
| -
|
|
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
|
|
|
|}

As you may have noticed the future tense is easy! The verbs take the same endings as the negated present tense but the ''mu'' is replaced with ''ma'' thus indicating future.

== When negation is used ==

When the verb is negated there must always find a negative particle (like ''mu'' or ''ma''). If not the sentence is ungrammatical as shown below:

<gl>
\gll *gis-wissugwatige-w
can-cook.1-NEG
\trans I cannot cook (intended meaning)
</gl>

The only form of the above sentence must be:

<gl>
\gll ma' gis-wissugwatige-w
NEG can-cook.1-NEG
\trans I cannot cook at this time
</gl>

<gl>
\gll mu gis-wissugwatige-w
can-cook.1-NEG
\trans I am unable to cook (something is preventing me from cooking)
</gl>

Thus it is seen that ''ma' '' comes before the verb, now making the sentence grammatical.

''ma' '' always precedes the future tense AND when the ''gis'' prefix is attached to the verb conjugated in the present for example:

<gl>
\gll ma' gis-amalga-w-g
NEG can-dance-NEG-3
\trans s/he cannot dance
</gl>

There are some expressions that always take the negative form of the verb such as ''me menga'' (not yet) and ''mowen'' (nobody) that take the negative form of the verb: (examples from [http://www.mikmaqonline.org/ Mi'gmaq Online Dictionary])

<gl>
\gll me' mnaq newt ajiegw
NEG yet one time-NEG-3
\trans it is not one o’clock yet
</gl>

<gl>
\gll mu-wen mijji-gw
NEG-who eat-NEG-3
\trans no one is eating
</gl>

<gl>
\gll mu goqwei etn-u-g
no thing be-NEG-3
\trans there is nothing there
</gl>

Below is a list of common particles after which the negated form is used. This list is not complete but these are the most common forms.

{| class="wikitable"
! Particle || When used || Translation
|-
| ''mu''
| before negated present and past
| not
|-
| ''mutt''
| before negated imperative
| do not
|-
| '''lpa mu''
| before negated present and past
| not even
|-
| ''mu wen''
| before negated present, past and future
| no one/nobody
|-
| ''mu goqwei'''
| before negated present, past and future
| nothing
|-
| ''me' mnaq''
| before negated verb
| not yet
|-
| ''ma' ''
| before negated future verb and preverb ''gis'' (can)
| not
|-
|}

''moqwa' goqwei'' is also spelled ''mu goqwei'' and a variant of this is ''mu'' + negated verb + ''goqwei'' when used in object position. It is inanimate. As in the following example:

<gl>
\gll mu malqutm-u goqwei
NEG eat.1>0-NEG what
\trans I eat nothing
</gl>

== Negative Concord ==
As can be seen above, Mi'gmaq is a negative concord language. Negative concord is where "double or multiple negative[s] [do] not express an affirmative but a negative" (van der Wouden & Zwarts, 1992). This is similar to French ''Je n'ai vue personne'' 'I have seen nobody' where both the ''ne'' and ''personne'' are both negative but the resulting sentence is negative, rather than each cancelling the other out resulting in a affirmative sentence, i.e. 'I have seen someone'. Mi'gmaq has negation marked in two places with both negative particles, i.e. ''mu'' & ''ma'', and a negative conjugation of the verb, i.e. with ''-u'' or ''-w'' added. Compare examples <glr id="1"/> and <glr id="2"/>.

<gl id="1">
\gll 'lpa'tuj eig'-p
boy be.there.PST-SG
\trans the boy was there
</gl>

<gl id="2">
\gll 'lpa'tuj mu eimu-g-u-p
boy NEG be.there-PST-NEG-SG
\trans the boy was not there
</gl>

= Word Order =
The negative particle (or possibly affix) ''mu'' always appears before the verb it negates. Although words can intervene between ''mu'' and the verb it negates, ''mu'' must always precede the verb.

<gl>
\gll Mali mu amal-gag-u-p
Mali NEG dance-PAST-NEG-SG
\trans Mali did not dance
</gl>

<gl>
\gll mu Mali amal-gag-u-p
NEG Mali dance-PAST-NEG-SG
\trans Mali did not dance
</gl>

Placement of ''mu'' post-verbally results in ungrammaticality, as illustrated below.

<gl>
\gll 'lpa'tuj mu eimug-u-p
boy NEG be.there.PST-NEG-SG
\trans the boy was not there
</gl>

Acceptable word orders:
*mu eimugup 'lpa'tuj
*mu 'lpa'tuj eimugup

Unacceptable word orders:
* *eimugup 'lpa'tuj mu
* *eimugup mu 'lpa'tuj
* *'lpa'tuj eimugup mu

Furthermore, with regards to word order, it appears that negation must come right before the constituent it negates. Here is an example sentence without negation:

<gl>
\gll ula na 'lpa'tuj ta'n egitg'p wi'gatign
this DEM boy that read.PST book
\trans this is the boy that read the book
</gl>

If we want to negate the first clause, as to say "This is '''not''' the boy that read the book", negation must directly precede 'boy'.

<gl>
\gll ula na mu 'lpa'tuj ta'n egitg'p wi'gatign
this DEM NEG boy that read.PST book
\trans this is not the boy that read the book
</gl>

The following word orders for negation in the first clause are impossible: *TO CHECK
* *ula na 'lpa'tuj mu...
* *ula mu na 'lpa'tuj...
* *mu ula na 'lpa'tuj...

If we want to negate the second clause, as to say "This is the boy that did '''not''' read the book", the word order may be varied, as long as negation comes before the verb (as discussed previously).

== Scope of Negation ==
As stated above, ''mu'' always comes before the verb. There may be particles that intrude between ''mu'' and the negated verb, but as long as ''mu'' comes before the negated verb, the structure is grammatical. [http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED136614.pdf Micmac Grammar, 1976] Sometimes the meaning of the sentence can change depending on the position of ''mu''.

<gl>
\gll 'gjitm Mali mu amal-gag-u-p
possible Mali NEG dance-PST-NEG-SG
\trans it is true that Mali did not dance
</gl>

*CHECK MORE

We would also expect phrases with adverb-like particles translatable as "it is possible" or "it is true" or "it is obvious" would also vary regarding negation.

=Language change and negation=
Often I was not able to elicit both the dual and plural forms of a verb. There are many times when I could only elicit the dual form, or times when the dual and plural forms were the same. It has been noted by our consultants that younger speakers are not using the plural forms but are using the dual form to mean both dual and plural. This seems be a language change happening currently in the speech community where the younger generation is leading the change. As noted in the paradigm above for 'eat' in the negated present tense, both dual and plural forms are the same. Here it seems that the plural form is used for both dual and plural meanings. This would strongly suggest a change happening in the speech community.

=References=
Clark, Jeremiah S. "A Dictionary of the Micmac Language." Rand's Micmac Dictionary. Charlottetown, PEI: The Patriot Publishing Company, 1902. Print.

Delisle, Gill L., and Manny L. Metallic. Micmac Teaching Grammar. Ecowi, QC: Thunderbird Press, 1976. Print.

L'Abbe Maillard, M. Grammaire De La Langue Mikmaque. New York: Presse Cramoisy de Jean-Marie Shea, 1864. Print.

Metallic, Janine. "Mi'gmaq Elicitation Session for Field Methods of Linguistics." Ed. Class, Carol Little and LING415. Montreal, QC: n/a, 2011. Print.

Payne, Thomas Edward. Describing Morphosyntax: a Guide for Field Linguists. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge UP, 2008. Print.

Paul-Martin, Patsy. "Mi'kmaq Verb Conjugation." Ed. Orthography, Mi'kmaq Talking Posters Smith/Francis. Truto, NS: Eastern Woodland Print Communications, 2011. Print.

Proulx, Paul. "Proto-Algonquian Verb Inflection." Studies in Native American Languages 15.2 (1990): 100-45. Print.

van der Wouden, Ton, and Frans Zwarts. "Negative Concord." D. Gilbers and S. Looyenga (eds), Language and Cognition 2. Yearbook 1992 Linguistic Theory and Knowledge Representation of the University of Groningen (1992): 317-31. Print.

Negation

2014-08-08T12:18:07Z

Carol: /* When negation is used */

=Introduction=
Negation is the process of turning affirmative statements into the opposite form. For example, the negative equivalent of affirmative sentence, ''I am eating'' is ''I am not eating''. In English there are a few processes at work. ''not'' must always come with an auxiliary verb like the verb 'to have' and 'to be'. In Mi'gmaq, with its extremely detailed and expansive verb conjugations in the present, it is not surprising that the negated conjugation of verbs is just as detailed and expansive as they are in the affirmative.

To start off any commentary on negation, it seems fitting to start of with the word "no" which is ''moqwa'' in Mi'gmaq. (The opposite of this is ''e'e'' , meaning "yes".) Negation in Mi'gmaq is similar to that of Obijwe in that there is both an affix that occurs between the verb and the person marker and a word that comes before the verb denoting negation. See [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ojibwe_grammar#Verbs Verb Conjugation in Ojibwe]. The Mi'gmaq negated affix is ''w'' or ''u'' which is very closely related to the Proto-Algonquian form for negation which is is ''*-w'' ( [http://kuscholarworks.ku.edu/dspace/bitstream/1808/440/1/ling.wp.v15.n2.paper6.pdf Proulx, 1990] ). ''w'' or ''u'' are very closely related phonetically since ''w'' is the semivowel corresponding to the vowel ''u''. Bear in mind that during the elicitation sessions, sometimes it was unsure whether to use ''w'' or ''u''.

Negation in Mi'gmaq consists of adding ''mu'' or ''ma'' then the verb conjugated in the negated verb form. After ''mu'' or ''ma'' the verb must always contain a negative particle. We must think of these two things as inseparable. ''mu'' always comes before the negative conjugated verb in the present or past, and ''ma'' always comes before future or if the prefix ''gis'' ('can', 'to be able to') is attached to the verb. All other prefixes abide by the rules ''mu'' before present or past and ''ma'' before future. There are other particles that take the negated form of the verb, but it is obvious that these particles express a negated idea.

Please note as well that in some of the studies on Mi'gmaq and Algonquian languages the term 'nonaffirmative' is used to describe the negated form. For consistency in this report, I will use the term 'negated' to indicate the form of the verb which is the opposite of affirmative. 'Nonaffirmative' and 'negated' however refer to the same process of negation.

= Conjugation of the Negated Verb =
I have selected the verb ''mijji'' (to eat). Please note that some resources spell this like ''mijji'' where other spell it ''miji'' ([http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED136614.pdf Micmac Teaching Grammar, 1976]). I have selected the spelling from [http://www.mikmaqonline.org/servlet/dictionaryFrameSet.html?arg0=mijjit&method=searchFromMikmaq the Migmaq talking dictionary]. It is also important to note that the Micmac Teaching Grammar uses an orthography that is different of all other orthographies used with Mi'gmaq. I will indicate which terms they are and give the Listuguj equivalent orthographical manner of writing them.

The simplified formula for the conjugation in the negated form: the base form + ''u'' or ''w'' + person ending ([http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED136614.pdf Micmac Teaching Grammar, 1976])
The base form for intransitive verbs is always the verb in the first person singular. For example I eat is ''mijji''. Now to create the second person singular we add the ending -''n'' denoting second person singular and get the form ''mijjin''. For another type of verb (henceforth referred to as the ''a'' verbs) we take the base form ''amalga-'' and add -''n'' to get ''amalgan'' (you dance) and to get the first person singular we add -''i''. Please note that it has been hypothesized that there are at least eleven different conjugations. We will only be dealing with a couple here. Because of reasons of time limitation, I was not able to elicit all eleven types but when there is a difference in conjugation, that will be noted. Note that in the plural the ''u'' or ''w'' comes after ''-ulti-''. This could be due the the fact that ''-ulti-'' is the plural affix that attaches to the base form of the verb and does not convey anything about the tense of the verb, rather it is used to denote that the verb is plural. Thus the ''u'' or ''w'' comes right before the tense marker which is always at the end of the verb. For the first person singular in present there is a null tense marker at the end of some verbs (for example the ''-i'' verbs) thus the negative marker is at the end.

== Present Tense ==
First is a comparison of the affirmative and negated paradigms of the verb ''mijji'' ('eat').

{| class="wikitable"
|+ mijji- 'eat'
|-
! scope="col" colspan="2"| ↓person / number→
! scope="col" | SG
! scope="col" | DU
! scope="col" | PL
|-
! scope="row" rowspan="2"| 1
! scope="row"| 13
| rowspan="2" | mijji
|mijjieg
|mijjultieg
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| mijji'gw
| mijjulti'gw
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2" | 2
| mijjin
| mijjioq
| mijjultioq
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2"| 3
| mijjit
| mijjijig
| mijjultijig
|-
|}

{| class="wikitable"
|+ mu mijji- 'not eat'
|-
! scope="col" colspan="2"| ↓person / number→
! scope="col" | SG
! scope="col" | DU
! scope="col" | PL
|-
! scope="row" rowspan="2"| 1
! scope="row"| 13
| rowspan="2" | mu mijjiw
| mu mijjiweg
| mu mijjultiweg
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| mu mijjigw
| mu mijjultigw
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2" | 2
| mu mijjiun
| mu mijjiwoq
| mu mijjultiwoq
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2"| 3
| mu mijjigw
| mu mijji'gw
| mu mijjulti'gw
|-
|}

The word ''mu'' signifies negation. When ''mu'' is in front of the verb, the verb must also be conjugated in the negative form. In the above table we see the intrusion of the sound ''u'', ''ew'' or ''w''. The following table illustrates the endings for the present negative tense, keeping in mind ''mu'' must ALWAYS come right before the negated verb. When ''mu'' precedes a verb it must ALWAYS be in the negated form.

Below is a table that summarizes the VAI -i stem negative person endings in present conjugation. Inanimate [IN] conjugation was taken from the Micmac Grammar (1976, pg 155).

{| class="wikitable"
|+ VAI -i stem negative present person endings
|-
! scope="col" colspan="2"| ↓person / number→
! scope="col" | SG
! scope="col" | DU
! scope="col" | PL
|-
! scope="row" rowspan="2"| 1
! scope="row"| 13
| rowspan="2" |-u
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2" | 2
| -
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2"| 3.AN
| -
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2"| 3.IN
| -
| -
| -
|-
|}

The forms for the first person dual and plural in the exclusive and inclusive forms are the same. As shown by other data, the dual form seems to be in the process of disappearing. This is one such example where the dual form does not exist for the plural first person. Some younger speakers do not use the dual form at all so it is not surprising that we find a gap in the dual form here. All this is according to the speaker but if we followed the pattern of the previous forms we would expect the dual form for the inclusive and exclusive first person to be ''-ieweg''. "When the verb is negated, then the -g third person is ALWAYS found" (Micmac Grammar, 1976 pg 93).

Below is a comparison of different verbs to give an idea of how to conjugate different types of verbs in the negated form. All forms are conjugated in the present singular third person animate. The form of -''elie-'' was taken from Micmac Grammar (pg 155). For more detail about these forms see [[VAI]].

{| class="wikitable"
! VAI stem || Base Form || Gloss || Affirmative || Gloss || Negated || Gloss
|-
| -i
| mijji-
| eat
| mijjit
| s/he eats
| mu mijjigw
| s/he does not eat
|-
| -a
| amalga-
| dance
| amalgat
| s/he dances
| mu amalgagw
| s/he does not dance
|-
| -a'si
| ala'si-
| go around
| ala'sit
| s/he goes around
| mu ala'sigw
| s/he does not go around
|-
| -e
| elie-
| go
| eliet
| s/he goes
| mu eliegw
| s/he does not go
|-
|}

For verb conjugations in the affirmative please see [http://firstnationhelp.com/ali/posters/pdf/verb_conjugation.pdf Mi'kmaq Verb Conjugation]. As you can see, this site uses the verb ''mijisi'' meaning 'to eat'. In Listuguj this is not used as the word for to eat because it sounds too close for the verb ''mejisi'' 'to excrete'.

=== Transitive ===
Below is the conjugation in present of a transitive verb that takes an inanimate object.

{| class="wikitable" style="text-align:center"
|+ VTI Conjugation Class 1: -m class
|-
! scope="col" | ↓subject / object→
! scope="col" | 0SG
! scope="col" | 0PL
|-
! scope="row" | 1
| malqutm
| malqutmann
|-
! scope="row" | 13
| malqutmeg
| malqutmegl
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| malqutmu'g
| malqutmu'gul
|-
! scope="row" | 2
| malqutmn
| malqutmnn
|-
! scope="row" | 2PL
| malqutmoq
| malqutmoqol
|-
! scope="row" | 3
| malqutmeg
| malqutmegl
|-
! scope="row" | 3PL
| malqutmi'tij
| malqutmi'titl
|}

{| class="wikitable" style="text-align:center"
|+ VTI Negative Conjugation Class 1: -m class
|-
! scope="col" | ↓subject / object→
! scope="col" | 0SG
! scope="col" | 0PL
|-
! scope="row" | 1
| mu malqutmu
| mu malqutmuann
|-
! scope="row" | 13
| mu malqutmueg
| mu malqutmuegl
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| mu malqutmugg
| mu malqutmuggul
|-
! scope="row" | 2
| mu malqutmu'n
| mu malqutmu'nn
|-
! scope="row" | 2PL
| mu malqutmuoq
| mu malqutmuoqol
|-
! scope="row" | 3
| mu malqutmug
| mu malqutmugul
|-
! scope="row" | 3PL
| mu malqutmi'tigw
| mu malqutmi'tigul
|-
|}

{| class="wikitable" style="text-align:center"
|+ VTI Negative Conjugation Class 1: -m class
|-
! scope="col" | ↓subject / object→
! scope="col" | 0SG
! scope="col" | 0PL
|-
! scope="row" | 1
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 13
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 12
|
|
|-
! scope="row" | 2
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 2PL
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 3
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 3PL
| -
| -
|-
|}

== Imperative ==
Here is the formation of the affirmative imperative:
{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijji-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 2 Second person
| mijji
| mijjigw
| mijjultigw
|-
|}

Now we compare it to the negated:
{| class="wikitable"
! ''mutt mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 2 Second person
| mutt mijjiw
| mutt mijjinew
| mutt mijjultinew
|-
|}

== Past Tense ==
Again for the past we compare the past and the negated past.

{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| mijjiap
| mijjieg'p
| mijjultieg'p
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| mijji'gup
| mijjulti'gup
|-
| 2 Second person
| mijjit'p
| mijjioqop
| mijjultioqop
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| mijjip
| mijjipni'g
| mijjultipni'g
|}

Now let us look at the negated forms.

{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| mu mijjiwap
| mu mijjiweg'p
| mu mijjultiweg'p
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| mu mijjiwgup
| mu mijjultiwgup/mijjultiggup
|-
| 2 Second person
| mu mijjiwt'p
| mu mijjiwoqop
| mu mijjultiwoqop
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| mu mijjigup
| mu mijjigupnig
| mu mijjultigupnig
|}

Thus this would be the conjugation of the negated form:

{| class="wikitable"
! Negated Past||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| -
| -
| -
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| -
| -
|-
| 2 Second person
| -
| -
| -
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| -
|
|
|}

For the third person the -''ug'p'' can change to -''weg'p'' for example:

<gl>
\gll Mu ala'ti-we-g'p
not go-NEG-SG.PAST
\trans She didn't go
</gl>

== Future Tense ==
First let us compare the affirmative tense for eat:

{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| mijjit's/mijjia's(List)
| mijjitesnen
| mijjultitesnen
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| mijjitesnu
| mijjultitesnu
|-
| 2 Second person
| mijjit'sg
| mijjitoqs'p
| mijjultitoqs'p
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| mijjitew
| mijjitaq
| mijjultitaq
|}
I was not able to elicit dual forms.

We compare the future affirmative with the negated below:

{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| ma' mijjiw
| ma' mijjiweg
| ma' mijjultiweg
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| ma' mijjigw
| ma' mijjultigw
|-
| 2 Second person
| ma' mijjiun
| ma' mijjiwoq
| ma' mijjultiwoq
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| ma' mijjigw
| ma' mijji'gw
| ma' mijjulti'gw
|}
NOTE: In the future the ''mu'' changes to ''ma' '' !! Like ''mu'', ''ma'' must always come before the verb conjugated in the negative future.
The correspondent was not able to produce a dual form in the future.

Now here is a paradigm of the negated endings in the future.

{| class="wikitable"
! Negated Future||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| -
| -
| -
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
|
| -
| -
|-
| 2 Second person
| -
|
|
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
|
|
|
|}

As you may have noticed the future tense is easy! The verbs take the same endings as the negated present tense but the ''mu'' is replaced with ''ma'' thus indicating future.

== When negation is used ==

When the verb is negated there must always find a negative particle (like ''mu'' or ''ma''). If not the sentence is ungrammatical as shown below:

<gl>
\gll *gis-wissugwatige-w
can-cook.1-NEG
\trans I cannot cook (intended meaning)
</gl>

The only form of the above sentence must be:

<gl>
\gll ma' gis-wissugwatige-w
NEG can-cook.1-NEG
\trans I cannot cook at this time
</gl>

<gl>
\gll mu gis-wissugwatige-w
can-cook.1-NEG
\trans I am unable to cook (something is preventing me from cooking)
</gl>

Thus it is seen that ''ma' '' comes before the verb, now making the sentence grammatical.

''ma' '' always precedes the future tense AND when the ''gis'' prefix is attached to the verb conjugated in the present for example:

<gl>
\gll ma' gis-amalga-w-g
NEG can-dance-NEG-3
\trans s/he cannot dance
</gl>

There are some expressions that always take the negative form of the verb such as ''me menga'' (not yet) and ''mowen'' (nobody) that take the negative form of the verb: (examples from [http://www.mikmaqonline.org/ Mi'gmaq Online Dictionary])

<gl>
\gll me' mnaq newt ajiegw
NEG yet one time-NEG-3
\trans it is not one o’clock yet
</gl>

<gl>
\gll mu-wen mijji-gw
NEG-who eat-NEG-3
\trans no one is eating
</gl>

<gl>
\gll mu goqwei etn-u-g
no thing be-NEG-3
\trans there is nothing there
</gl>

Below is a list of common particles after which the negated form is used. This list is not complete but these are the most common forms.

{| class="wikitable"
! Particle || When used || Translation
|-
| ''mu''
| before negated present and past
| not
|-
| ''mutt''
| before negated imperative
| do not
|-
| '''lpa mu''
| before negated present and past
| not even
|-
| ''mu wen''
| before negated present, past and future
| no one/nobody
|-
| ''mu goqwei'''
| before negated present, past and future
| nothing
|-
| ''me' mnaq''
| before negated verb
| not yet
|-
| ''ma' ''
| before negated future verb and preverb ''gis'' (can)
| not
|-
|}

''moqwa' goqwei'' is also spelled ''mu goqwei'' and a variant of this is ''mu'' + negated verb + ''goqwei'' when used in object position. It is inanimate. As in the following example:

<gl>
\gll mu malqutm-u goqwei
NEG eat.1>0-NEG what
\trans I eat nothing
</gl>

== Negative Concord ==
As can be seen above, Mi'gmaq is a negative concord language. Negative concord is where "double or multiple negative[s] [do] not express an affirmative but a negative" (van der Wouden & Zwarts, 1992). This is similar to French ''Je n'ai vue personne'' 'I have seen nobody' where both the ''ne'' and ''personne'' are both negative but the resulting sentence is negative, rather than each cancelling the other out resulting in a affirmative sentence, i.e. 'I have seen someone'. Mi'gmaq has negation marked in two places with both negative particles, i.e. ''mu'' & ''ma'', and a negative conjugation of the verb, i.e. with ''-u'' or ''-w'' added. Compare examples <glr id="1"/> and <glr id="2"/>.

<gl id="1">
\gll 'lpa'tuj eig'-p
boy be.there.PST-SG
\trans the boy was there
</gl>

<gl id="2">
\gll 'lpa'tuj mu eimu-g-u-p
boy NEG be.there-PST-NEG-SG
\trans the boy was not there
</gl>

= Word Order =
The negative particle (or possibly affix) ''mu'' always appears before the verb it negates. Although words can intervene between ''mu'' and the verb it negates, ''mu'' must always precede the verb.

<gl>
\gll Mali mu amal-gag-u-p
Mali NEG dance-PAST-NEG-SG
\trans Mali did not dance
</gl>

<gl>
\gll mu Mali amal-gag-u-p
NEG Mali dance-PAST-NEG-SG
\trans Mali did not dance
</gl>

Placement of ''mu'' post-verbally results in ungrammaticality, as illustrated below.

<gl>
\gll 'lpa'tuj mu eimug-u-p
boy NEG be.there.PST-NEG-SG
\trans the boy was not there
</gl>

Acceptable word orders:
*mu eimugup 'lpa'tuj
*mu 'lpa'tuj eimugup

Unacceptable word orders:
* *eimugup 'lpa'tuj mu
* *eimugup mu 'lpa'tuj
* *'lpa'tuj eimugup mu

Furthermore, with regards to word order, it appears that negation must come right before the constituent it negates. Here is an example sentence without negation:

<gl>
\gll ula na 'lpa'tuj ta'n egitg'p wi'gatign
this DEM boy that read.PST book
\trans this is the boy that read the book
</gl>

If we want to negate the first clause, as to say "This is '''not''' the boy that read the book", negation must directly precede 'boy'.

<gl>
\gll ula na mu 'lpa'tuj ta'n egitg'p wi'gatign
this DEM NEG boy that read.PST book
\trans this is not the boy that read the book
</gl>

The following word orders for negation in the first clause are impossible: *TO CHECK
* *ula na 'lpa'tuj mu...
* *ula mu na 'lpa'tuj...
* *mu ula na 'lpa'tuj...

If we want to negate the second clause, as to say "This is the boy that did '''not''' read the book", the word order may be varied, as long as negation comes before the verb (as discussed previously).

== Scope of Negation ==
As stated above, ''mu'' always comes before the verb. There may be particles that intrude between ''mu'' and the negated verb, but as long as ''mu'' comes before the negated verb, the structure is grammatical. [http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED136614.pdf Micmac Grammar, 1976] Sometimes the meaning of the sentence can change depending on the position of ''mu''.

<gl>
\gll 'gjitm Mali mu amal-gag-u-p
possible Mali NEG dance-PST-NEG-SG
\trans it is true that Mali did not dance
</gl>

We would also expect phrases with adverb-like particles translatable as "it is possible" or "it is true" or "it is obvious" would also vary regarding negation.

=Language change and negation=
Often I was not able to elicit both the dual and plural forms of a verb. There are many times when I could only elicit the dual form, or times when the dual and plural forms were the same. It has been noted by our consultants that younger speakers are not using the plural forms but are using the dual form to mean both dual and plural. This seems be a language change happening currently in the speech community where the younger generation is leading the change. As noted in the paradigm above for 'eat' in the negated present tense, both dual and plural forms are the same. Here it seems that the plural form is used for both dual and plural meanings. This would strongly suggest a change happening in the speech community.

=References=
Clark, Jeremiah S. "A Dictionary of the Micmac Language." Rand's Micmac Dictionary. Charlottetown, PEI: The Patriot Publishing Company, 1902. Print.

Delisle, Gill L., and Manny L. Metallic. Micmac Teaching Grammar. Ecowi, QC: Thunderbird Press, 1976. Print.

L'Abbe Maillard, M. Grammaire De La Langue Mikmaque. New York: Presse Cramoisy de Jean-Marie Shea, 1864. Print.

Metallic, Janine. "Mi'gmaq Elicitation Session for Field Methods of Linguistics." Ed. Class, Carol Little and LING415. Montreal, QC: n/a, 2011. Print.

Payne, Thomas Edward. Describing Morphosyntax: a Guide for Field Linguists. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge UP, 2008. Print.

Paul-Martin, Patsy. "Mi'kmaq Verb Conjugation." Ed. Orthography, Mi'kmaq Talking Posters Smith/Francis. Truto, NS: Eastern Woodland Print Communications, 2011. Print.

Proulx, Paul. "Proto-Algonquian Verb Inflection." Studies in Native American Languages 15.2 (1990): 100-45. Print.

van der Wouden, Ton, and Frans Zwarts. "Negative Concord." D. Gilbers and S. Looyenga (eds), Language and Cognition 2. Yearbook 1992 Linguistic Theory and Knowledge Representation of the University of Groningen (1992): 317-31. Print.

Negation

2014-08-07T19:20:07Z

Carol: /* Scope of Negation */

=Introduction=
Negation is the process of turning affirmative statements into the opposite form. For example, the negative equivalent of affirmative sentence, ''I am eating'' is ''I am not eating''. In English there are a few processes at work. ''not'' must always come with an auxiliary verb like the verb 'to have' and 'to be'. In Mi'gmaq, with its extremely detailed and expansive verb conjugations in the present, it is not surprising that the negated conjugation of verbs is just as detailed and expansive as they are in the affirmative.

To start off any commentary on negation, it seems fitting to start of with the word "no" which is ''moqwa'' in Mi'gmaq. (The opposite of this is ''e'e'' , meaning "yes".) Negation in Mi'gmaq is similar to that of Obijwe in that there is both an affix that occurs between the verb and the person marker and a word that comes before the verb denoting negation. See [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ojibwe_grammar#Verbs Verb Conjugation in Ojibwe]. The Mi'gmaq negated affix is ''w'' or ''u'' which is very closely related to the Proto-Algonquian form for negation which is is ''*-w'' ( [http://kuscholarworks.ku.edu/dspace/bitstream/1808/440/1/ling.wp.v15.n2.paper6.pdf Proulx, 1990] ). ''w'' or ''u'' are very closely related phonetically since ''w'' is the semivowel corresponding to the vowel ''u''. Bear in mind that during the elicitation sessions, sometimes it was unsure whether to use ''w'' or ''u''.

Negation in Mi'gmaq consists of adding ''mu'' or ''ma'' then the verb conjugated in the negated verb form. After ''mu'' or ''ma'' the verb must always contain a negative particle. We must think of these two things as inseparable. ''mu'' always comes before the negative conjugated verb in the present or past, and ''ma'' always comes before future or if the prefix ''gis'' ('can', 'to be able to') is attached to the verb. All other prefixes abide by the rules ''mu'' before present or past and ''ma'' before future. There are other particles that take the negated form of the verb, but it is obvious that these particles express a negated idea.

Please note as well that in some of the studies on Mi'gmaq and Algonquian languages the term 'nonaffirmative' is used to describe the negated form. For consistency in this report, I will use the term 'negated' to indicate the form of the verb which is the opposite of affirmative. 'Nonaffirmative' and 'negated' however refer to the same process of negation.

= Conjugation of the Negated Verb =
I have selected the verb ''mijji'' (to eat). Please note that some resources spell this like ''mijji'' where other spell it ''miji'' ([http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED136614.pdf Micmac Teaching Grammar, 1976]). I have selected the spelling from [http://www.mikmaqonline.org/servlet/dictionaryFrameSet.html?arg0=mijjit&method=searchFromMikmaq the Migmaq talking dictionary]. It is also important to note that the Micmac Teaching Grammar uses an orthography that is different of all other orthographies used with Mi'gmaq. I will indicate which terms they are and give the Listuguj equivalent orthographical manner of writing them.

The simplified formula for the conjugation in the negated form: the base form + ''u'' or ''w'' + person ending ([http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED136614.pdf Micmac Teaching Grammar, 1976])
The base form for intransitive verbs is always the verb in the first person singular. For example I eat is ''mijji''. Now to create the second person singular we add the ending -''n'' denoting second person singular and get the form ''mijjin''. For another type of verb (henceforth referred to as the ''a'' verbs) we take the base form ''amalga-'' and add -''n'' to get ''amalgan'' (you dance) and to get the first person singular we add -''i''. Please note that it has been hypothesized that there are at least eleven different conjugations. We will only be dealing with a couple here. Because of reasons of time limitation, I was not able to elicit all eleven types but when there is a difference in conjugation, that will be noted. Note that in the plural the ''u'' or ''w'' comes after ''-ulti-''. This could be due the the fact that ''-ulti-'' is the plural affix that attaches to the base form of the verb and does not convey anything about the tense of the verb, rather it is used to denote that the verb is plural. Thus the ''u'' or ''w'' comes right before the tense marker which is always at the end of the verb. For the first person singular in present there is a null tense marker at the end of some verbs (for example the ''-i'' verbs) thus the negative marker is at the end.

== Present Tense ==
First is a comparison of the affirmative and negated paradigms of the verb ''mijji'' ('eat').

{| class="wikitable"
|+ mijji- 'eat'
|-
! scope="col" colspan="2"| ↓person / number→
! scope="col" | SG
! scope="col" | DU
! scope="col" | PL
|-
! scope="row" rowspan="2"| 1
! scope="row"| 13
| rowspan="2" | mijji
|mijjieg
|mijjultieg
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| mijji'gw
| mijjulti'gw
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2" | 2
| mijjin
| mijjioq
| mijjultioq
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2"| 3
| mijjit
| mijjijig
| mijjultijig
|-
|}

{| class="wikitable"
|+ mu mijji- 'not eat'
|-
! scope="col" colspan="2"| ↓person / number→
! scope="col" | SG
! scope="col" | DU
! scope="col" | PL
|-
! scope="row" rowspan="2"| 1
! scope="row"| 13
| rowspan="2" | mu mijjiw
| mu mijjiweg
| mu mijjultiweg
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| mu mijjigw
| mu mijjultigw
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2" | 2
| mu mijjiun
| mu mijjiwoq
| mu mijjultiwoq
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2"| 3
| mu mijjigw
| mu mijji'gw
| mu mijjulti'gw
|-
|}

The word ''mu'' signifies negation. When ''mu'' is in front of the verb, the verb must also be conjugated in the negative form. In the above table we see the intrusion of the sound ''u'', ''ew'' or ''w''. The following table illustrates the endings for the present negative tense, keeping in mind ''mu'' must ALWAYS come right before the negated verb. When ''mu'' precedes a verb it must ALWAYS be in the negated form.

Below is a table that summarizes the VAI -i stem negative person endings in present conjugation. Inanimate [IN] conjugation was taken from the Micmac Grammar (1976, pg 155).

{| class="wikitable"
|+ VAI -i stem negative present person endings
|-
! scope="col" colspan="2"| ↓person / number→
! scope="col" | SG
! scope="col" | DU
! scope="col" | PL
|-
! scope="row" rowspan="2"| 1
! scope="row"| 13
| rowspan="2" |-u
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2" | 2
| -
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2"| 3.AN
| -
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2"| 3.IN
| -
| -
| -
|-
|}

The forms for the first person dual and plural in the exclusive and inclusive forms are the same. As shown by other data, the dual form seems to be in the process of disappearing. This is one such example where the dual form does not exist for the plural first person. Some younger speakers do not use the dual form at all so it is not surprising that we find a gap in the dual form here. All this is according to the speaker but if we followed the pattern of the previous forms we would expect the dual form for the inclusive and exclusive first person to be ''-ieweg''. "When the verb is negated, then the -g third person is ALWAYS found" (Micmac Grammar, 1976 pg 93).

Below is a comparison of different verbs to give an idea of how to conjugate different types of verbs in the negated form. All forms are conjugated in the present singular third person animate. The form of -''elie-'' was taken from Micmac Grammar (pg 155). For more detail about these forms see [[VAI]].

{| class="wikitable"
! VAI stem || Base Form || Gloss || Affirmative || Gloss || Negated || Gloss
|-
| -i
| mijji-
| eat
| mijjit
| s/he eats
| mu mijjigw
| s/he does not eat
|-
| -a
| amalga-
| dance
| amalgat
| s/he dances
| mu amalgagw
| s/he does not dance
|-
| -a'si
| ala'si-
| go around
| ala'sit
| s/he goes around
| mu ala'sigw
| s/he does not go around
|-
| -e
| elie-
| go
| eliet
| s/he goes
| mu eliegw
| s/he does not go
|-
|}

For verb conjugations in the affirmative please see [http://firstnationhelp.com/ali/posters/pdf/verb_conjugation.pdf Mi'kmaq Verb Conjugation]. As you can see, this site uses the verb ''mijisi'' meaning 'to eat'. In Listuguj this is not used as the word for to eat because it sounds too close for the verb ''mejisi'' 'to excrete'.

=== Transitive ===
Below is the conjugation in present of a transitive verb that takes an inanimate object.

{| class="wikitable" style="text-align:center"
|+ VTI Conjugation Class 1: -m class
|-
! scope="col" | ↓subject / object→
! scope="col" | 0SG
! scope="col" | 0PL
|-
! scope="row" | 1
| malqutm
| malqutmann
|-
! scope="row" | 13
| malqutmeg
| malqutmegl
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| malqutmu'g
| malqutmu'gul
|-
! scope="row" | 2
| malqutmn
| malqutmnn
|-
! scope="row" | 2PL
| malqutmoq
| malqutmoqol
|-
! scope="row" | 3
| malqutmeg
| malqutmegl
|-
! scope="row" | 3PL
| malqutmi'tij
| malqutmi'titl
|}

{| class="wikitable" style="text-align:center"
|+ VTI Negative Conjugation Class 1: -m class
|-
! scope="col" | ↓subject / object→
! scope="col" | 0SG
! scope="col" | 0PL
|-
! scope="row" | 1
| mu malqutmu
| mu malqutmuann
|-
! scope="row" | 13
| mu malqutmueg
| mu malqutmuegl
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| mu malqutmugg
| mu malqutmuggul
|-
! scope="row" | 2
| mu malqutmu'n
| mu malqutmu'nn
|-
! scope="row" | 2PL
| mu malqutmuoq
| mu malqutmuoqol
|-
! scope="row" | 3
| mu malqutmug
| mu malqutmugul
|-
! scope="row" | 3PL
| mu malqutmi'tigw
| mu malqutmi'tigul
|-
|}

{| class="wikitable" style="text-align:center"
|+ VTI Negative Conjugation Class 1: -m class
|-
! scope="col" | ↓subject / object→
! scope="col" | 0SG
! scope="col" | 0PL
|-
! scope="row" | 1
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 13
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 12
|
|
|-
! scope="row" | 2
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 2PL
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 3
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 3PL
| -
| -
|-
|}

== Imperative ==
Here is the formation of the affirmative imperative:
{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijji-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 2 Second person
| mijji
| mijjigw
| mijjultigw
|-
|}

Now we compare it to the negated:
{| class="wikitable"
! ''mutt mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 2 Second person
| mutt mijjiw
| mutt mijjinew
| mutt mijjultinew
|-
|}

== Past Tense ==
Again for the past we compare the past and the negated past.

{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| mijjiap
| mijjieg'p
| mijjultieg'p
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| mijji'gup
| mijjulti'gup
|-
| 2 Second person
| mijjit'p
| mijjioqop
| mijjultioqop
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| mijjip
| mijjipni'g
| mijjultipni'g
|}

Now let us look at the negated forms.

{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| mu mijjiwap
| mu mijjiweg'p
| mu mijjultiweg'p
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| mu mijjiwgup
| mu mijjultiwgup/mijjultiggup
|-
| 2 Second person
| mu mijjiwt'p
| mu mijjiwoqop
| mu mijjultiwoqop
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| mu mijjigup
| mu mijjigupnig
| mu mijjultigupnig
|}

Thus this would be the conjugation of the negated form:

{| class="wikitable"
! Negated Past||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| -
| -
| -
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| -
| -
|-
| 2 Second person
| -
| -
| -
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| -
|
|
|}

For the third person the -''ug'p'' can change to -''weg'p'' for example:

<gl>
\gll Mu ala'ti-we-g'p
not go-NEG-SG.PAST
\trans She didn't go
</gl>

== Future Tense ==
First let us compare the affirmative tense for eat:

{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| mijjit's/mijjia's(List)
| mijjitesnen
| mijjultitesnen
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| mijjitesnu
| mijjultitesnu
|-
| 2 Second person
| mijjit'sg
| mijjitoqs'p
| mijjultitoqs'p
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| mijjitew
| mijjitaq
| mijjultitaq
|}
I was not able to elicit dual forms.

We compare the future affirmative with the negated below:

{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| ma' mijjiw
| ma' mijjiweg
| ma' mijjultiweg
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| ma' mijjigw
| ma' mijjultigw
|-
| 2 Second person
| ma' mijjiun
| ma' mijjiwoq
| ma' mijjultiwoq
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| ma' mijjigw
| ma' mijji'gw
| ma' mijjulti'gw
|}
NOTE: In the future the ''mu'' changes to ''ma' '' !! Like ''mu'', ''ma'' must always come before the verb conjugated in the negative future.
The correspondent was not able to produce a dual form in the future.

Now here is a paradigm of the negated endings in the future.

{| class="wikitable"
! Negated Future||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| -
| -
| -
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
|
| -
| -
|-
| 2 Second person
| -
|
|
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
|
|
|
|}

As you may have noticed the future tense is easy! The verbs take the same endings as the negated present tense but the ''mu'' is replaced with ''ma'' thus indicating future.

== When negation is used ==

When the verb is negated there must always find a negative particle (like ''mu'' or ''ma''). If not the sentence is ungrammatical as shown below:

<gl>
\gll *gis-wissugwatige-w
can-cook.1-NEG
\trans I cannot cook (intended meaning)
</gl>

The only form of the above sentence must be:

<gl>
\gll ma' gis-wissugwatige-w
NEG can-cook.1-NEG
\trans I cannot cook at this time
</gl>

<gl>
\gll mu gis-wissugwatige-w
can-cook.1-NEG
\trans I am unable to cook (something is preventing me from cooking)
</gl>

Thus it is seen that ''ma' '' comes before the verb, now making the sentence grammatical.

''ma' '' always precedes the future tense AND when the ''gis'' prefix is attached to the verb conjugated in the present for example:

<gl>
\gll ma' gis-amalga-w-g
NEG can-dance-NEG-3
\trans s/he cannot dance
</gl>

There are some expressions that always take the negative form of the verb such as ''me menga'' (not yet) and ''mowen'' (nobody) that take the negative form of the verb: (examples from [http://www.mikmaqonline.org/ Mi'gmaq Online Dictionary])

<gl>
\gll me' mnaq newt ajiegw
NEG yet one time-NEG-3
\trans it is not one o’clock yet
</gl>

<gl>
\gll mu-wen mijji-gw
NEG-who eat-NEG-3
\trans no one is eating
</gl>

<gl>
\gll mu goqwei eign-u-g
no thing be-NEG-3
\trans there is nothing there
</gl>

Below is a list of common particles after which the negated form is used. This list is not complete but these are the most common forms.

{| class="wikitable"
! Particle || When used || Translation
|-
| ''mu''
| before negated present and past
| not
|-
| ''mutt''
| before negated imperative
| do not
|-
| '''lpa mu''
| before negated present and past
| not even
|-
| ''mu wen''
| before negated present, past and future
| no one/nobody
|-
| ''mu goqwei'''
| before negated present, past and future
| nothing
|-
| ''me' mnaq''
| before negated verb
| not yet
|-
| ''ma' ''
| before negated future verb and preverb ''gis'' (can)
| not
|-
|}

''moqwa' goqwei'' is also spelled ''mu goqwei'' and a variant of this is ''mu'' + negated verb + ''goqwei'' when used in object position. It is inanimate. As in the following example:

<gl>
\gll mu malqutm-u goqwei
NEG eat.1>0-NEG what
\trans I eat nothing
</gl>

== Negative Concord ==
As can be seen above, Mi'gmaq is a negative concord language. Negative concord is where "double or multiple negative[s] [do] not express an affirmative but a negative" (van der Wouden & Zwarts, 1992). This is similar to French ''Je n'ai vue personne'' 'I have seen nobody' where both the ''ne'' and ''personne'' are both negative but the resulting sentence is negative, rather than each cancelling the other out resulting in a affirmative sentence, i.e. 'I have seen someone'. Mi'gmaq has negation marked in two places with both negative particles, i.e. ''mu'' & ''ma'', and a negative conjugation of the verb, i.e. with ''-u'' or ''-w'' added. Compare examples <glr id="1"/> and <glr id="2"/>.

<gl id="1">
\gll 'lpa'tuj eig'-p
boy be.there.PST-SG
\trans the boy was there
</gl>

<gl id="2">
\gll 'lpa'tuj mu eimu-g-u-p
boy NEG be.there-PST-NEG-SG
\trans the boy was not there
</gl>

= Word Order =
The negative particle (or possibly affix) ''mu'' always appears before the verb it negates. Although words can intervene between ''mu'' and the verb it negates, ''mu'' must always precede the verb.

<gl>
\gll Mali mu amal-gag-u-p
Mali NEG dance-PAST-NEG-SG
\trans Mali did not dance
</gl>

<gl>
\gll mu Mali amal-gag-u-p
NEG Mali dance-PAST-NEG-SG
\trans Mali did not dance
</gl>

Placement of ''mu'' post-verbally results in ungrammaticality, as illustrated below.

<gl>
\gll 'lpa'tuj mu eimug-u-p
boy NEG be.there.PST-NEG-SG
\trans the boy was not there
</gl>

Acceptable word orders:
*mu eimugup 'lpa'tuj
*mu 'lpa'tuj eimugup

Unacceptable word orders:
* *eimugup 'lpa'tuj mu
* *eimugup mu 'lpa'tuj
* *'lpa'tuj eimugup mu

Furthermore, with regards to word order, it appears that negation must come right before the constituent it negates. Here is an example sentence without negation:

<gl>
\gll ula na 'lpa'tuj ta'n egitg'p wi'gatign
this DEM boy that read.PST book
\trans this is the boy that read the book
</gl>

If we want to negate the first clause, as to say "This is '''not''' the boy that read the book", negation must directly precede 'boy'.

<gl>
\gll ula na mu 'lpa'tuj ta'n egitg'p wi'gatign
this DEM NEG boy that read.PST book
\trans this is not the boy that read the book
</gl>

The following word orders for negation in the first clause are impossible: *TO CHECK
* *ula na 'lpa'tuj mu...
* *ula mu na 'lpa'tuj...
* *mu ula na 'lpa'tuj...

If we want to negate the second clause, as to say "This is the boy that did '''not''' read the book", the word order may be varied, as long as negation comes before the verb (as discussed previously).

== Scope of Negation ==
As stated above, ''mu'' always comes before the verb. There may be particles that intrude between ''mu'' and the negated verb, but as long as ''mu'' comes before the negated verb, the structure is grammatical. [http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED136614.pdf Micmac Grammar, 1976] Sometimes the meaning of the sentence can change depending on the position of ''mu''.

<gl>
\gll 'gjitm Mali mu amal-gag-u-p
possible Mali NEG dance-PST-NEG-SG
\trans it is true that Mali did not dance
</gl>

We would also expect phrases with adverb-like particles translatable as "it is possible" or "it is true" or "it is obvious" would also vary regarding negation.

=Language change and negation=
Often I was not able to elicit both the dual and plural forms of a verb. There are many times when I could only elicit the dual form, or times when the dual and plural forms were the same. It has been noted by our consultants that younger speakers are not using the plural forms but are using the dual form to mean both dual and plural. This seems be a language change happening currently in the speech community where the younger generation is leading the change. As noted in the paradigm above for 'eat' in the negated present tense, both dual and plural forms are the same. Here it seems that the plural form is used for both dual and plural meanings. This would strongly suggest a change happening in the speech community.

=References=
Clark, Jeremiah S. "A Dictionary of the Micmac Language." Rand's Micmac Dictionary. Charlottetown, PEI: The Patriot Publishing Company, 1902. Print.

Delisle, Gill L., and Manny L. Metallic. Micmac Teaching Grammar. Ecowi, QC: Thunderbird Press, 1976. Print.

L'Abbe Maillard, M. Grammaire De La Langue Mikmaque. New York: Presse Cramoisy de Jean-Marie Shea, 1864. Print.

Metallic, Janine. "Mi'gmaq Elicitation Session for Field Methods of Linguistics." Ed. Class, Carol Little and LING415. Montreal, QC: n/a, 2011. Print.

Payne, Thomas Edward. Describing Morphosyntax: a Guide for Field Linguists. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge UP, 2008. Print.

Paul-Martin, Patsy. "Mi'kmaq Verb Conjugation." Ed. Orthography, Mi'kmaq Talking Posters Smith/Francis. Truto, NS: Eastern Woodland Print Communications, 2011. Print.

Proulx, Paul. "Proto-Algonquian Verb Inflection." Studies in Native American Languages 15.2 (1990): 100-45. Print.

van der Wouden, Ton, and Frans Zwarts. "Negative Concord." D. Gilbers and S. Looyenga (eds), Language and Cognition 2. Yearbook 1992 Linguistic Theory and Knowledge Representation of the University of Groningen (1992): 317-31. Print.

Negation

2014-08-07T19:17:19Z

Carol: /* Scope of Negation */

=Introduction=
Negation is the process of turning affirmative statements into the opposite form. For example, the negative equivalent of affirmative sentence, ''I am eating'' is ''I am not eating''. In English there are a few processes at work. ''not'' must always come with an auxiliary verb like the verb 'to have' and 'to be'. In Mi'gmaq, with its extremely detailed and expansive verb conjugations in the present, it is not surprising that the negated conjugation of verbs is just as detailed and expansive as they are in the affirmative.

To start off any commentary on negation, it seems fitting to start of with the word "no" which is ''moqwa'' in Mi'gmaq. (The opposite of this is ''e'e'' , meaning "yes".) Negation in Mi'gmaq is similar to that of Obijwe in that there is both an affix that occurs between the verb and the person marker and a word that comes before the verb denoting negation. See [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ojibwe_grammar#Verbs Verb Conjugation in Ojibwe]. The Mi'gmaq negated affix is ''w'' or ''u'' which is very closely related to the Proto-Algonquian form for negation which is is ''*-w'' ( [http://kuscholarworks.ku.edu/dspace/bitstream/1808/440/1/ling.wp.v15.n2.paper6.pdf Proulx, 1990] ). ''w'' or ''u'' are very closely related phonetically since ''w'' is the semivowel corresponding to the vowel ''u''. Bear in mind that during the elicitation sessions, sometimes it was unsure whether to use ''w'' or ''u''.

Negation in Mi'gmaq consists of adding ''mu'' or ''ma'' then the verb conjugated in the negated verb form. After ''mu'' or ''ma'' the verb must always contain a negative particle. We must think of these two things as inseparable. ''mu'' always comes before the negative conjugated verb in the present or past, and ''ma'' always comes before future or if the prefix ''gis'' ('can', 'to be able to') is attached to the verb. All other prefixes abide by the rules ''mu'' before present or past and ''ma'' before future. There are other particles that take the negated form of the verb, but it is obvious that these particles express a negated idea.

Please note as well that in some of the studies on Mi'gmaq and Algonquian languages the term 'nonaffirmative' is used to describe the negated form. For consistency in this report, I will use the term 'negated' to indicate the form of the verb which is the opposite of affirmative. 'Nonaffirmative' and 'negated' however refer to the same process of negation.

= Conjugation of the Negated Verb =
I have selected the verb ''mijji'' (to eat). Please note that some resources spell this like ''mijji'' where other spell it ''miji'' ([http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED136614.pdf Micmac Teaching Grammar, 1976]). I have selected the spelling from [http://www.mikmaqonline.org/servlet/dictionaryFrameSet.html?arg0=mijjit&method=searchFromMikmaq the Migmaq talking dictionary]. It is also important to note that the Micmac Teaching Grammar uses an orthography that is different of all other orthographies used with Mi'gmaq. I will indicate which terms they are and give the Listuguj equivalent orthographical manner of writing them.

The simplified formula for the conjugation in the negated form: the base form + ''u'' or ''w'' + person ending ([http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED136614.pdf Micmac Teaching Grammar, 1976])
The base form for intransitive verbs is always the verb in the first person singular. For example I eat is ''mijji''. Now to create the second person singular we add the ending -''n'' denoting second person singular and get the form ''mijjin''. For another type of verb (henceforth referred to as the ''a'' verbs) we take the base form ''amalga-'' and add -''n'' to get ''amalgan'' (you dance) and to get the first person singular we add -''i''. Please note that it has been hypothesized that there are at least eleven different conjugations. We will only be dealing with a couple here. Because of reasons of time limitation, I was not able to elicit all eleven types but when there is a difference in conjugation, that will be noted. Note that in the plural the ''u'' or ''w'' comes after ''-ulti-''. This could be due the the fact that ''-ulti-'' is the plural affix that attaches to the base form of the verb and does not convey anything about the tense of the verb, rather it is used to denote that the verb is plural. Thus the ''u'' or ''w'' comes right before the tense marker which is always at the end of the verb. For the first person singular in present there is a null tense marker at the end of some verbs (for example the ''-i'' verbs) thus the negative marker is at the end.

== Present Tense ==
First is a comparison of the affirmative and negated paradigms of the verb ''mijji'' ('eat').

{| class="wikitable"
|+ mijji- 'eat'
|-
! scope="col" colspan="2"| ↓person / number→
! scope="col" | SG
! scope="col" | DU
! scope="col" | PL
|-
! scope="row" rowspan="2"| 1
! scope="row"| 13
| rowspan="2" | mijji
|mijjieg
|mijjultieg
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| mijji'gw
| mijjulti'gw
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2" | 2
| mijjin
| mijjioq
| mijjultioq
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2"| 3
| mijjit
| mijjijig
| mijjultijig
|-
|}

{| class="wikitable"
|+ mu mijji- 'not eat'
|-
! scope="col" colspan="2"| ↓person / number→
! scope="col" | SG
! scope="col" | DU
! scope="col" | PL
|-
! scope="row" rowspan="2"| 1
! scope="row"| 13
| rowspan="2" | mu mijjiw
| mu mijjiweg
| mu mijjultiweg
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| mu mijjigw
| mu mijjultigw
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2" | 2
| mu mijjiun
| mu mijjiwoq
| mu mijjultiwoq
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2"| 3
| mu mijjigw
| mu mijji'gw
| mu mijjulti'gw
|-
|}

The word ''mu'' signifies negation. When ''mu'' is in front of the verb, the verb must also be conjugated in the negative form. In the above table we see the intrusion of the sound ''u'', ''ew'' or ''w''. The following table illustrates the endings for the present negative tense, keeping in mind ''mu'' must ALWAYS come right before the negated verb. When ''mu'' precedes a verb it must ALWAYS be in the negated form.

Below is a table that summarizes the VAI -i stem negative person endings in present conjugation. Inanimate [IN] conjugation was taken from the Micmac Grammar (1976, pg 155).

{| class="wikitable"
|+ VAI -i stem negative present person endings
|-
! scope="col" colspan="2"| ↓person / number→
! scope="col" | SG
! scope="col" | DU
! scope="col" | PL
|-
! scope="row" rowspan="2"| 1
! scope="row"| 13
| rowspan="2" |-u
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2" | 2
| -
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2"| 3.AN
| -
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2"| 3.IN
| -
| -
| -
|-
|}

The forms for the first person dual and plural in the exclusive and inclusive forms are the same. As shown by other data, the dual form seems to be in the process of disappearing. This is one such example where the dual form does not exist for the plural first person. Some younger speakers do not use the dual form at all so it is not surprising that we find a gap in the dual form here. All this is according to the speaker but if we followed the pattern of the previous forms we would expect the dual form for the inclusive and exclusive first person to be ''-ieweg''. "When the verb is negated, then the -g third person is ALWAYS found" (Micmac Grammar, 1976 pg 93).

Below is a comparison of different verbs to give an idea of how to conjugate different types of verbs in the negated form. All forms are conjugated in the present singular third person animate. The form of -''elie-'' was taken from Micmac Grammar (pg 155). For more detail about these forms see [[VAI]].

{| class="wikitable"
! VAI stem || Base Form || Gloss || Affirmative || Gloss || Negated || Gloss
|-
| -i
| mijji-
| eat
| mijjit
| s/he eats
| mu mijjigw
| s/he does not eat
|-
| -a
| amalga-
| dance
| amalgat
| s/he dances
| mu amalgagw
| s/he does not dance
|-
| -a'si
| ala'si-
| go around
| ala'sit
| s/he goes around
| mu ala'sigw
| s/he does not go around
|-
| -e
| elie-
| go
| eliet
| s/he goes
| mu eliegw
| s/he does not go
|-
|}

For verb conjugations in the affirmative please see [http://firstnationhelp.com/ali/posters/pdf/verb_conjugation.pdf Mi'kmaq Verb Conjugation]. As you can see, this site uses the verb ''mijisi'' meaning 'to eat'. In Listuguj this is not used as the word for to eat because it sounds too close for the verb ''mejisi'' 'to excrete'.

=== Transitive ===
Below is the conjugation in present of a transitive verb that takes an inanimate object.

{| class="wikitable" style="text-align:center"
|+ VTI Conjugation Class 1: -m class
|-
! scope="col" | ↓subject / object→
! scope="col" | 0SG
! scope="col" | 0PL
|-
! scope="row" | 1
| malqutm
| malqutmann
|-
! scope="row" | 13
| malqutmeg
| malqutmegl
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| malqutmu'g
| malqutmu'gul
|-
! scope="row" | 2
| malqutmn
| malqutmnn
|-
! scope="row" | 2PL
| malqutmoq
| malqutmoqol
|-
! scope="row" | 3
| malqutmeg
| malqutmegl
|-
! scope="row" | 3PL
| malqutmi'tij
| malqutmi'titl
|}

{| class="wikitable" style="text-align:center"
|+ VTI Negative Conjugation Class 1: -m class
|-
! scope="col" | ↓subject / object→
! scope="col" | 0SG
! scope="col" | 0PL
|-
! scope="row" | 1
| mu malqutmu
| mu malqutmuann
|-
! scope="row" | 13
| mu malqutmueg
| mu malqutmuegl
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| mu malqutmugg
| mu malqutmuggul
|-
! scope="row" | 2
| mu malqutmu'n
| mu malqutmu'nn
|-
! scope="row" | 2PL
| mu malqutmuoq
| mu malqutmuoqol
|-
! scope="row" | 3
| mu malqutmug
| mu malqutmugul
|-
! scope="row" | 3PL
| mu malqutmi'tigw
| mu malqutmi'tigul
|-
|}

{| class="wikitable" style="text-align:center"
|+ VTI Negative Conjugation Class 1: -m class
|-
! scope="col" | ↓subject / object→
! scope="col" | 0SG
! scope="col" | 0PL
|-
! scope="row" | 1
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 13
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 12
|
|
|-
! scope="row" | 2
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 2PL
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 3
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 3PL
| -
| -
|-
|}

== Imperative ==
Here is the formation of the affirmative imperative:
{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijji-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 2 Second person
| mijji
| mijjigw
| mijjultigw
|-
|}

Now we compare it to the negated:
{| class="wikitable"
! ''mutt mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 2 Second person
| mutt mijjiw
| mutt mijjinew
| mutt mijjultinew
|-
|}

== Past Tense ==
Again for the past we compare the past and the negated past.

{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| mijjiap
| mijjieg'p
| mijjultieg'p
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| mijji'gup
| mijjulti'gup
|-
| 2 Second person
| mijjit'p
| mijjioqop
| mijjultioqop
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| mijjip
| mijjipni'g
| mijjultipni'g
|}

Now let us look at the negated forms.

{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| mu mijjiwap
| mu mijjiweg'p
| mu mijjultiweg'p
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| mu mijjiwgup
| mu mijjultiwgup/mijjultiggup
|-
| 2 Second person
| mu mijjiwt'p
| mu mijjiwoqop
| mu mijjultiwoqop
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| mu mijjigup
| mu mijjigupnig
| mu mijjultigupnig
|}

Thus this would be the conjugation of the negated form:

{| class="wikitable"
! Negated Past||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| -
| -
| -
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| -
| -
|-
| 2 Second person
| -
| -
| -
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| -
|
|
|}

For the third person the -''ug'p'' can change to -''weg'p'' for example:

<gl>
\gll Mu ala'ti-we-g'p
not go-NEG-SG.PAST
\trans She didn't go
</gl>

== Future Tense ==
First let us compare the affirmative tense for eat:

{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| mijjit's/mijjia's(List)
| mijjitesnen
| mijjultitesnen
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| mijjitesnu
| mijjultitesnu
|-
| 2 Second person
| mijjit'sg
| mijjitoqs'p
| mijjultitoqs'p
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| mijjitew
| mijjitaq
| mijjultitaq
|}
I was not able to elicit dual forms.

We compare the future affirmative with the negated below:

{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| ma' mijjiw
| ma' mijjiweg
| ma' mijjultiweg
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| ma' mijjigw
| ma' mijjultigw
|-
| 2 Second person
| ma' mijjiun
| ma' mijjiwoq
| ma' mijjultiwoq
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| ma' mijjigw
| ma' mijji'gw
| ma' mijjulti'gw
|}
NOTE: In the future the ''mu'' changes to ''ma' '' !! Like ''mu'', ''ma'' must always come before the verb conjugated in the negative future.
The correspondent was not able to produce a dual form in the future.

Now here is a paradigm of the negated endings in the future.

{| class="wikitable"
! Negated Future||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| -
| -
| -
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
|
| -
| -
|-
| 2 Second person
| -
|
|
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
|
|
|
|}

As you may have noticed the future tense is easy! The verbs take the same endings as the negated present tense but the ''mu'' is replaced with ''ma'' thus indicating future.

== When negation is used ==

When the verb is negated there must always find a negative particle (like ''mu'' or ''ma''). If not the sentence is ungrammatical as shown below:

<gl>
\gll *gis-wissugwatige-w
can-cook.1-NEG
\trans I cannot cook (intended meaning)
</gl>

The only form of the above sentence must be:

<gl>
\gll ma' gis-wissugwatige-w
NEG can-cook.1-NEG
\trans I cannot cook at this time
</gl>

<gl>
\gll mu gis-wissugwatige-w
can-cook.1-NEG
\trans I am unable to cook (something is preventing me from cooking)
</gl>

Thus it is seen that ''ma' '' comes before the verb, now making the sentence grammatical.

''ma' '' always precedes the future tense AND when the ''gis'' prefix is attached to the verb conjugated in the present for example:

<gl>
\gll ma' gis-amalga-w-g
NEG can-dance-NEG-3
\trans s/he cannot dance
</gl>

There are some expressions that always take the negative form of the verb such as ''me menga'' (not yet) and ''mowen'' (nobody) that take the negative form of the verb: (examples from [http://www.mikmaqonline.org/ Mi'gmaq Online Dictionary])

<gl>
\gll me' mnaq newt ajiegw
NEG yet one time-NEG-3
\trans it is not one o’clock yet
</gl>

<gl>
\gll mu-wen mijji-gw
NEG-who eat-NEG-3
\trans no one is eating
</gl>

<gl>
\gll mu goqwei eign-u-g
no thing be-NEG-3
\trans there is nothing there
</gl>

Below is a list of common particles after which the negated form is used. This list is not complete but these are the most common forms.

{| class="wikitable"
! Particle || When used || Translation
|-
| ''mu''
| before negated present and past
| not
|-
| ''mutt''
| before negated imperative
| do not
|-
| '''lpa mu''
| before negated present and past
| not even
|-
| ''mu wen''
| before negated present, past and future
| no one/nobody
|-
| ''mu goqwei'''
| before negated present, past and future
| nothing
|-
| ''me' mnaq''
| before negated verb
| not yet
|-
| ''ma' ''
| before negated future verb and preverb ''gis'' (can)
| not
|-
|}

''moqwa' goqwei'' is also spelled ''mu goqwei'' and a variant of this is ''mu'' + negated verb + ''goqwei'' when used in object position. It is inanimate. As in the following example:

<gl>
\gll mu malqutm-u goqwei
NEG eat.1>0-NEG what
\trans I eat nothing
</gl>

== Negative Concord ==
As can be seen above, Mi'gmaq is a negative concord language. Negative concord is where "double or multiple negative[s] [do] not express an affirmative but a negative" (van der Wouden & Zwarts, 1992). This is similar to French ''Je n'ai vue personne'' 'I have seen nobody' where both the ''ne'' and ''personne'' are both negative but the resulting sentence is negative, rather than each cancelling the other out resulting in a affirmative sentence, i.e. 'I have seen someone'. Mi'gmaq has negation marked in two places with both negative particles, i.e. ''mu'' & ''ma'', and a negative conjugation of the verb, i.e. with ''-u'' or ''-w'' added. Compare examples <glr id="1"/> and <glr id="2"/>.

<gl id="1">
\gll 'lpa'tuj eig'-p
boy be.there.PST-SG
\trans the boy was there
</gl>

<gl id="2">
\gll 'lpa'tuj mu eimu-g-u-p
boy NEG be.there-PST-NEG-SG
\trans the boy was not there
</gl>

= Word Order =
The negative particle (or possibly affix) ''mu'' always appears before the verb it negates. Although words can intervene between ''mu'' and the verb it negates, ''mu'' must always precede the verb.

<gl>
\gll Mali mu amal-gag-u-p
Mali NEG dance-PAST-NEG-SG
\trans Mali did not dance
</gl>

<gl>
\gll mu Mali amal-gag-u-p
NEG Mali dance-PAST-NEG-SG
\trans Mali did not dance
</gl>

Placement of ''mu'' post-verbally results in ungrammaticality, as illustrated below.

<gl>
\gll 'lpa'tuj mu eimug-u-p
boy NEG be.there.PST-NEG-SG
\trans the boy was not there
</gl>

Acceptable word orders:
*mu eimugup 'lpa'tuj
*mu 'lpa'tuj eimugup

Unacceptable word orders:
* *eimugup 'lpa'tuj mu
* *eimugup mu 'lpa'tuj
* *'lpa'tuj eimugup mu

Furthermore, with regards to word order, it appears that negation must come right before the constituent it negates. Here is an example sentence without negation:

<gl>
\gll ula na 'lpa'tuj ta'n egitg'p wi'gatign
this DEM boy that read.PST book
\trans this is the boy that read the book
</gl>

If we want to negate the first clause, as to say "This is '''not''' the boy that read the book", negation must directly precede 'boy'.

<gl>
\gll ula na mu 'lpa'tuj ta'n egitg'p wi'gatign
this DEM NEG boy that read.PST book
\trans this is not the boy that read the book
</gl>

The following word orders for negation in the first clause are impossible: *TO CHECK
* *ula na 'lpa'tuj mu...
* *ula mu na 'lpa'tuj...
* *mu ula na 'lpa'tuj...

If we want to negate the second clause, as to say "This is the boy that did '''not''' read the book", the word order may be varied, as long as negation comes before the verb (as discussed previously).

== Scope of Negation ==
As stated above, ''mu'' always comes before the verb. There may be particles that intrude between ''mu'' and the negated verb, but as long as ''mu'' comes before the negated verb, the structure is grammatical. [http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED136614.pdf Micmac Grammar, 1976] Sometimes the meaning of the sentence can change depending on the position of ''mu''.

<gl>
\gll 'gjitm Mali mu amal-gag-u-p
possible Mali NEG dance-PST-NEG-SG
\trans it is true that Mali did not dance
</gl>

<gl>
\gll mu 'gjitm Mali amal-gag-u-p *TO CHECK
NEG possible Mali dance-PST.NEG.SG
\trans it is not true that Mali danced
</gl>

We would also expect phrases with adverb-like particles translatable as "it is possible" or "it is true" or "it is obvious" would also vary regarding negation.

=Language change and negation=
Often I was not able to elicit both the dual and plural forms of a verb. There are many times when I could only elicit the dual form, or times when the dual and plural forms were the same. It has been noted by our consultants that younger speakers are not using the plural forms but are using the dual form to mean both dual and plural. This seems be a language change happening currently in the speech community where the younger generation is leading the change. As noted in the paradigm above for 'eat' in the negated present tense, both dual and plural forms are the same. Here it seems that the plural form is used for both dual and plural meanings. This would strongly suggest a change happening in the speech community.

=References=
Clark, Jeremiah S. "A Dictionary of the Micmac Language." Rand's Micmac Dictionary. Charlottetown, PEI: The Patriot Publishing Company, 1902. Print.

Delisle, Gill L., and Manny L. Metallic. Micmac Teaching Grammar. Ecowi, QC: Thunderbird Press, 1976. Print.

L'Abbe Maillard, M. Grammaire De La Langue Mikmaque. New York: Presse Cramoisy de Jean-Marie Shea, 1864. Print.

Metallic, Janine. "Mi'gmaq Elicitation Session for Field Methods of Linguistics." Ed. Class, Carol Little and LING415. Montreal, QC: n/a, 2011. Print.

Payne, Thomas Edward. Describing Morphosyntax: a Guide for Field Linguists. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge UP, 2008. Print.

Paul-Martin, Patsy. "Mi'kmaq Verb Conjugation." Ed. Orthography, Mi'kmaq Talking Posters Smith/Francis. Truto, NS: Eastern Woodland Print Communications, 2011. Print.

Proulx, Paul. "Proto-Algonquian Verb Inflection." Studies in Native American Languages 15.2 (1990): 100-45. Print.

van der Wouden, Ton, and Frans Zwarts. "Negative Concord." D. Gilbers and S. Looyenga (eds), Language and Cognition 2. Yearbook 1992 Linguistic Theory and Knowledge Representation of the University of Groningen (1992): 317-31. Print.

Negation

2014-08-07T19:16:18Z

Carol: /* Word Order */

=Introduction=
Negation is the process of turning affirmative statements into the opposite form. For example, the negative equivalent of affirmative sentence, ''I am eating'' is ''I am not eating''. In English there are a few processes at work. ''not'' must always come with an auxiliary verb like the verb 'to have' and 'to be'. In Mi'gmaq, with its extremely detailed and expansive verb conjugations in the present, it is not surprising that the negated conjugation of verbs is just as detailed and expansive as they are in the affirmative.

To start off any commentary on negation, it seems fitting to start of with the word "no" which is ''moqwa'' in Mi'gmaq. (The opposite of this is ''e'e'' , meaning "yes".) Negation in Mi'gmaq is similar to that of Obijwe in that there is both an affix that occurs between the verb and the person marker and a word that comes before the verb denoting negation. See [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ojibwe_grammar#Verbs Verb Conjugation in Ojibwe]. The Mi'gmaq negated affix is ''w'' or ''u'' which is very closely related to the Proto-Algonquian form for negation which is is ''*-w'' ( [http://kuscholarworks.ku.edu/dspace/bitstream/1808/440/1/ling.wp.v15.n2.paper6.pdf Proulx, 1990] ). ''w'' or ''u'' are very closely related phonetically since ''w'' is the semivowel corresponding to the vowel ''u''. Bear in mind that during the elicitation sessions, sometimes it was unsure whether to use ''w'' or ''u''.

Negation in Mi'gmaq consists of adding ''mu'' or ''ma'' then the verb conjugated in the negated verb form. After ''mu'' or ''ma'' the verb must always contain a negative particle. We must think of these two things as inseparable. ''mu'' always comes before the negative conjugated verb in the present or past, and ''ma'' always comes before future or if the prefix ''gis'' ('can', 'to be able to') is attached to the verb. All other prefixes abide by the rules ''mu'' before present or past and ''ma'' before future. There are other particles that take the negated form of the verb, but it is obvious that these particles express a negated idea.

Please note as well that in some of the studies on Mi'gmaq and Algonquian languages the term 'nonaffirmative' is used to describe the negated form. For consistency in this report, I will use the term 'negated' to indicate the form of the verb which is the opposite of affirmative. 'Nonaffirmative' and 'negated' however refer to the same process of negation.

= Conjugation of the Negated Verb =
I have selected the verb ''mijji'' (to eat). Please note that some resources spell this like ''mijji'' where other spell it ''miji'' ([http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED136614.pdf Micmac Teaching Grammar, 1976]). I have selected the spelling from [http://www.mikmaqonline.org/servlet/dictionaryFrameSet.html?arg0=mijjit&method=searchFromMikmaq the Migmaq talking dictionary]. It is also important to note that the Micmac Teaching Grammar uses an orthography that is different of all other orthographies used with Mi'gmaq. I will indicate which terms they are and give the Listuguj equivalent orthographical manner of writing them.

The simplified formula for the conjugation in the negated form: the base form + ''u'' or ''w'' + person ending ([http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED136614.pdf Micmac Teaching Grammar, 1976])
The base form for intransitive verbs is always the verb in the first person singular. For example I eat is ''mijji''. Now to create the second person singular we add the ending -''n'' denoting second person singular and get the form ''mijjin''. For another type of verb (henceforth referred to as the ''a'' verbs) we take the base form ''amalga-'' and add -''n'' to get ''amalgan'' (you dance) and to get the first person singular we add -''i''. Please note that it has been hypothesized that there are at least eleven different conjugations. We will only be dealing with a couple here. Because of reasons of time limitation, I was not able to elicit all eleven types but when there is a difference in conjugation, that will be noted. Note that in the plural the ''u'' or ''w'' comes after ''-ulti-''. This could be due the the fact that ''-ulti-'' is the plural affix that attaches to the base form of the verb and does not convey anything about the tense of the verb, rather it is used to denote that the verb is plural. Thus the ''u'' or ''w'' comes right before the tense marker which is always at the end of the verb. For the first person singular in present there is a null tense marker at the end of some verbs (for example the ''-i'' verbs) thus the negative marker is at the end.

== Present Tense ==
First is a comparison of the affirmative and negated paradigms of the verb ''mijji'' ('eat').

{| class="wikitable"
|+ mijji- 'eat'
|-
! scope="col" colspan="2"| ↓person / number→
! scope="col" | SG
! scope="col" | DU
! scope="col" | PL
|-
! scope="row" rowspan="2"| 1
! scope="row"| 13
| rowspan="2" | mijji
|mijjieg
|mijjultieg
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| mijji'gw
| mijjulti'gw
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2" | 2
| mijjin
| mijjioq
| mijjultioq
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2"| 3
| mijjit
| mijjijig
| mijjultijig
|-
|}

{| class="wikitable"
|+ mu mijji- 'not eat'
|-
! scope="col" colspan="2"| ↓person / number→
! scope="col" | SG
! scope="col" | DU
! scope="col" | PL
|-
! scope="row" rowspan="2"| 1
! scope="row"| 13
| rowspan="2" | mu mijjiw
| mu mijjiweg
| mu mijjultiweg
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| mu mijjigw
| mu mijjultigw
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2" | 2
| mu mijjiun
| mu mijjiwoq
| mu mijjultiwoq
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2"| 3
| mu mijjigw
| mu mijji'gw
| mu mijjulti'gw
|-
|}

The word ''mu'' signifies negation. When ''mu'' is in front of the verb, the verb must also be conjugated in the negative form. In the above table we see the intrusion of the sound ''u'', ''ew'' or ''w''. The following table illustrates the endings for the present negative tense, keeping in mind ''mu'' must ALWAYS come right before the negated verb. When ''mu'' precedes a verb it must ALWAYS be in the negated form.

Below is a table that summarizes the VAI -i stem negative person endings in present conjugation. Inanimate [IN] conjugation was taken from the Micmac Grammar (1976, pg 155).

{| class="wikitable"
|+ VAI -i stem negative present person endings
|-
! scope="col" colspan="2"| ↓person / number→
! scope="col" | SG
! scope="col" | DU
! scope="col" | PL
|-
! scope="row" rowspan="2"| 1
! scope="row"| 13
| rowspan="2" |-u
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2" | 2
| -
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2"| 3.AN
| -
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2"| 3.IN
| -
| -
| -
|-
|}

The forms for the first person dual and plural in the exclusive and inclusive forms are the same. As shown by other data, the dual form seems to be in the process of disappearing. This is one such example where the dual form does not exist for the plural first person. Some younger speakers do not use the dual form at all so it is not surprising that we find a gap in the dual form here. All this is according to the speaker but if we followed the pattern of the previous forms we would expect the dual form for the inclusive and exclusive first person to be ''-ieweg''. "When the verb is negated, then the -g third person is ALWAYS found" (Micmac Grammar, 1976 pg 93).

Below is a comparison of different verbs to give an idea of how to conjugate different types of verbs in the negated form. All forms are conjugated in the present singular third person animate. The form of -''elie-'' was taken from Micmac Grammar (pg 155). For more detail about these forms see [[VAI]].

{| class="wikitable"
! VAI stem || Base Form || Gloss || Affirmative || Gloss || Negated || Gloss
|-
| -i
| mijji-
| eat
| mijjit
| s/he eats
| mu mijjigw
| s/he does not eat
|-
| -a
| amalga-
| dance
| amalgat
| s/he dances
| mu amalgagw
| s/he does not dance
|-
| -a'si
| ala'si-
| go around
| ala'sit
| s/he goes around
| mu ala'sigw
| s/he does not go around
|-
| -e
| elie-
| go
| eliet
| s/he goes
| mu eliegw
| s/he does not go
|-
|}

For verb conjugations in the affirmative please see [http://firstnationhelp.com/ali/posters/pdf/verb_conjugation.pdf Mi'kmaq Verb Conjugation]. As you can see, this site uses the verb ''mijisi'' meaning 'to eat'. In Listuguj this is not used as the word for to eat because it sounds too close for the verb ''mejisi'' 'to excrete'.

=== Transitive ===
Below is the conjugation in present of a transitive verb that takes an inanimate object.

{| class="wikitable" style="text-align:center"
|+ VTI Conjugation Class 1: -m class
|-
! scope="col" | ↓subject / object→
! scope="col" | 0SG
! scope="col" | 0PL
|-
! scope="row" | 1
| malqutm
| malqutmann
|-
! scope="row" | 13
| malqutmeg
| malqutmegl
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| malqutmu'g
| malqutmu'gul
|-
! scope="row" | 2
| malqutmn
| malqutmnn
|-
! scope="row" | 2PL
| malqutmoq
| malqutmoqol
|-
! scope="row" | 3
| malqutmeg
| malqutmegl
|-
! scope="row" | 3PL
| malqutmi'tij
| malqutmi'titl
|}

{| class="wikitable" style="text-align:center"
|+ VTI Negative Conjugation Class 1: -m class
|-
! scope="col" | ↓subject / object→
! scope="col" | 0SG
! scope="col" | 0PL
|-
! scope="row" | 1
| mu malqutmu
| mu malqutmuann
|-
! scope="row" | 13
| mu malqutmueg
| mu malqutmuegl
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| mu malqutmugg
| mu malqutmuggul
|-
! scope="row" | 2
| mu malqutmu'n
| mu malqutmu'nn
|-
! scope="row" | 2PL
| mu malqutmuoq
| mu malqutmuoqol
|-
! scope="row" | 3
| mu malqutmug
| mu malqutmugul
|-
! scope="row" | 3PL
| mu malqutmi'tigw
| mu malqutmi'tigul
|-
|}

{| class="wikitable" style="text-align:center"
|+ VTI Negative Conjugation Class 1: -m class
|-
! scope="col" | ↓subject / object→
! scope="col" | 0SG
! scope="col" | 0PL
|-
! scope="row" | 1
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 13
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 12
|
|
|-
! scope="row" | 2
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 2PL
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 3
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 3PL
| -
| -
|-
|}

== Imperative ==
Here is the formation of the affirmative imperative:
{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijji-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 2 Second person
| mijji
| mijjigw
| mijjultigw
|-
|}

Now we compare it to the negated:
{| class="wikitable"
! ''mutt mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 2 Second person
| mutt mijjiw
| mutt mijjinew
| mutt mijjultinew
|-
|}

== Past Tense ==
Again for the past we compare the past and the negated past.

{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| mijjiap
| mijjieg'p
| mijjultieg'p
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| mijji'gup
| mijjulti'gup
|-
| 2 Second person
| mijjit'p
| mijjioqop
| mijjultioqop
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| mijjip
| mijjipni'g
| mijjultipni'g
|}

Now let us look at the negated forms.

{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| mu mijjiwap
| mu mijjiweg'p
| mu mijjultiweg'p
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| mu mijjiwgup
| mu mijjultiwgup/mijjultiggup
|-
| 2 Second person
| mu mijjiwt'p
| mu mijjiwoqop
| mu mijjultiwoqop
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| mu mijjigup
| mu mijjigupnig
| mu mijjultigupnig
|}

Thus this would be the conjugation of the negated form:

{| class="wikitable"
! Negated Past||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| -
| -
| -
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| -
| -
|-
| 2 Second person
| -
| -
| -
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| -
|
|
|}

For the third person the -''ug'p'' can change to -''weg'p'' for example:

<gl>
\gll Mu ala'ti-we-g'p
not go-NEG-SG.PAST
\trans She didn't go
</gl>

== Future Tense ==
First let us compare the affirmative tense for eat:

{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| mijjit's/mijjia's(List)
| mijjitesnen
| mijjultitesnen
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| mijjitesnu
| mijjultitesnu
|-
| 2 Second person
| mijjit'sg
| mijjitoqs'p
| mijjultitoqs'p
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| mijjitew
| mijjitaq
| mijjultitaq
|}
I was not able to elicit dual forms.

We compare the future affirmative with the negated below:

{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| ma' mijjiw
| ma' mijjiweg
| ma' mijjultiweg
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| ma' mijjigw
| ma' mijjultigw
|-
| 2 Second person
| ma' mijjiun
| ma' mijjiwoq
| ma' mijjultiwoq
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| ma' mijjigw
| ma' mijji'gw
| ma' mijjulti'gw
|}
NOTE: In the future the ''mu'' changes to ''ma' '' !! Like ''mu'', ''ma'' must always come before the verb conjugated in the negative future.
The correspondent was not able to produce a dual form in the future.

Now here is a paradigm of the negated endings in the future.

{| class="wikitable"
! Negated Future||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| -
| -
| -
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
|
| -
| -
|-
| 2 Second person
| -
|
|
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
|
|
|
|}

As you may have noticed the future tense is easy! The verbs take the same endings as the negated present tense but the ''mu'' is replaced with ''ma'' thus indicating future.

== When negation is used ==

When the verb is negated there must always find a negative particle (like ''mu'' or ''ma''). If not the sentence is ungrammatical as shown below:

<gl>
\gll *gis-wissugwatige-w
can-cook.1-NEG
\trans I cannot cook (intended meaning)
</gl>

The only form of the above sentence must be:

<gl>
\gll ma' gis-wissugwatige-w
NEG can-cook.1-NEG
\trans I cannot cook at this time
</gl>

<gl>
\gll mu gis-wissugwatige-w
can-cook.1-NEG
\trans I am unable to cook (something is preventing me from cooking)
</gl>

Thus it is seen that ''ma' '' comes before the verb, now making the sentence grammatical.

''ma' '' always precedes the future tense AND when the ''gis'' prefix is attached to the verb conjugated in the present for example:

<gl>
\gll ma' gis-amalga-w-g
NEG can-dance-NEG-3
\trans s/he cannot dance
</gl>

There are some expressions that always take the negative form of the verb such as ''me menga'' (not yet) and ''mowen'' (nobody) that take the negative form of the verb: (examples from [http://www.mikmaqonline.org/ Mi'gmaq Online Dictionary])

<gl>
\gll me' mnaq newt ajiegw
NEG yet one time-NEG-3
\trans it is not one o’clock yet
</gl>

<gl>
\gll mu-wen mijji-gw
NEG-who eat-NEG-3
\trans no one is eating
</gl>

<gl>
\gll mu goqwei eign-u-g
no thing be-NEG-3
\trans there is nothing there
</gl>

Below is a list of common particles after which the negated form is used. This list is not complete but these are the most common forms.

{| class="wikitable"
! Particle || When used || Translation
|-
| ''mu''
| before negated present and past
| not
|-
| ''mutt''
| before negated imperative
| do not
|-
| '''lpa mu''
| before negated present and past
| not even
|-
| ''mu wen''
| before negated present, past and future
| no one/nobody
|-
| ''mu goqwei'''
| before negated present, past and future
| nothing
|-
| ''me' mnaq''
| before negated verb
| not yet
|-
| ''ma' ''
| before negated future verb and preverb ''gis'' (can)
| not
|-
|}

''moqwa' goqwei'' is also spelled ''mu goqwei'' and a variant of this is ''mu'' + negated verb + ''goqwei'' when used in object position. It is inanimate. As in the following example:

<gl>
\gll mu malqutm-u goqwei
NEG eat.1>0-NEG what
\trans I eat nothing
</gl>

== Negative Concord ==
As can be seen above, Mi'gmaq is a negative concord language. Negative concord is where "double or multiple negative[s] [do] not express an affirmative but a negative" (van der Wouden & Zwarts, 1992). This is similar to French ''Je n'ai vue personne'' 'I have seen nobody' where both the ''ne'' and ''personne'' are both negative but the resulting sentence is negative, rather than each cancelling the other out resulting in a affirmative sentence, i.e. 'I have seen someone'. Mi'gmaq has negation marked in two places with both negative particles, i.e. ''mu'' & ''ma'', and a negative conjugation of the verb, i.e. with ''-u'' or ''-w'' added. Compare examples <glr id="1"/> and <glr id="2"/>.

<gl id="1">
\gll 'lpa'tuj eig'-p
boy be.there.PST-SG
\trans the boy was there
</gl>

<gl id="2">
\gll 'lpa'tuj mu eimu-g-u-p
boy NEG be.there-PST-NEG-SG
\trans the boy was not there
</gl>

= Word Order =
The negative particle (or possibly affix) ''mu'' always appears before the verb it negates. Although words can intervene between ''mu'' and the verb it negates, ''mu'' must always precede the verb.

<gl>
\gll Mali mu amal-gag-u-p
Mali NEG dance-PAST-NEG-SG
\trans Mali did not dance
</gl>

<gl>
\gll mu Mali amal-gag-u-p
NEG Mali dance-PAST-NEG-SG
\trans Mali did not dance
</gl>

Placement of ''mu'' post-verbally results in ungrammaticality, as illustrated below.

<gl>
\gll 'lpa'tuj mu eimug-u-p
boy NEG be.there.PST-NEG-SG
\trans the boy was not there
</gl>

Acceptable word orders:
*mu eimugup 'lpa'tuj
*mu 'lpa'tuj eimugup

Unacceptable word orders:
* *eimugup 'lpa'tuj mu
* *eimugup mu 'lpa'tuj
* *'lpa'tuj eimugup mu

Furthermore, with regards to word order, it appears that negation must come right before the constituent it negates. Here is an example sentence without negation:

<gl>
\gll ula na 'lpa'tuj ta'n egitg'p wi'gatign
this DEM boy that read.PST book
\trans this is the boy that read the book
</gl>

If we want to negate the first clause, as to say "This is '''not''' the boy that read the book", negation must directly precede 'boy'.

<gl>
\gll ula na mu 'lpa'tuj ta'n egitg'p wi'gatign
this DEM NEG boy that read.PST book
\trans this is not the boy that read the book
</gl>

The following word orders for negation in the first clause are impossible: *TO CHECK
* *ula na 'lpa'tuj mu...
* *ula mu na 'lpa'tuj...
* *mu ula na 'lpa'tuj...

If we want to negate the second clause, as to say "This is the boy that did '''not''' read the book", the word order may be varied, as long as negation comes before the verb (as discussed previously).

== Scope of Negation ==
As stated above, ''mu'' always comes before the verb. There may be particles that intrude between ''mu'' and the negated verb, but as long as ''mu'' comes before the negated verb, the structure is grammatical. [http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED136614.pdf Micmac Grammar, 1976] Sometimes the meaning of the sentence can change depending on the position of ''mu''.

<gl>
\gll 'gjitm Mali mu amal-gag-u-p
possible Mali NEG dance-PST-NEG-SG
\trans it is true that Mali did not dance
</gl>

<gl>
\gll *mu 'gjitm Mali amal-gag-u-p
NEG possible Mali dance-PST.NEG.SG
\trans it is not true that Mali danced
</gl>

We would also expect phrases with adverb-like particles translatable as "it is possible" or "it is true" or "it is obvious" would also vary regarding negation.

=Language change and negation=
Often I was not able to elicit both the dual and plural forms of a verb. There are many times when I could only elicit the dual form, or times when the dual and plural forms were the same. It has been noted by our consultants that younger speakers are not using the plural forms but are using the dual form to mean both dual and plural. This seems be a language change happening currently in the speech community where the younger generation is leading the change. As noted in the paradigm above for 'eat' in the negated present tense, both dual and plural forms are the same. Here it seems that the plural form is used for both dual and plural meanings. This would strongly suggest a change happening in the speech community.

=References=
Clark, Jeremiah S. "A Dictionary of the Micmac Language." Rand's Micmac Dictionary. Charlottetown, PEI: The Patriot Publishing Company, 1902. Print.

Delisle, Gill L., and Manny L. Metallic. Micmac Teaching Grammar. Ecowi, QC: Thunderbird Press, 1976. Print.

L'Abbe Maillard, M. Grammaire De La Langue Mikmaque. New York: Presse Cramoisy de Jean-Marie Shea, 1864. Print.

Metallic, Janine. "Mi'gmaq Elicitation Session for Field Methods of Linguistics." Ed. Class, Carol Little and LING415. Montreal, QC: n/a, 2011. Print.

Payne, Thomas Edward. Describing Morphosyntax: a Guide for Field Linguists. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge UP, 2008. Print.

Paul-Martin, Patsy. "Mi'kmaq Verb Conjugation." Ed. Orthography, Mi'kmaq Talking Posters Smith/Francis. Truto, NS: Eastern Woodland Print Communications, 2011. Print.

Proulx, Paul. "Proto-Algonquian Verb Inflection." Studies in Native American Languages 15.2 (1990): 100-45. Print.

van der Wouden, Ton, and Frans Zwarts. "Negative Concord." D. Gilbers and S. Looyenga (eds), Language and Cognition 2. Yearbook 1992 Linguistic Theory and Knowledge Representation of the University of Groningen (1992): 317-31. Print.

Negation

2014-08-07T19:11:05Z

Carol: /* Negative Concord */

=Introduction=
Negation is the process of turning affirmative statements into the opposite form. For example, the negative equivalent of affirmative sentence, ''I am eating'' is ''I am not eating''. In English there are a few processes at work. ''not'' must always come with an auxiliary verb like the verb 'to have' and 'to be'. In Mi'gmaq, with its extremely detailed and expansive verb conjugations in the present, it is not surprising that the negated conjugation of verbs is just as detailed and expansive as they are in the affirmative.

To start off any commentary on negation, it seems fitting to start of with the word "no" which is ''moqwa'' in Mi'gmaq. (The opposite of this is ''e'e'' , meaning "yes".) Negation in Mi'gmaq is similar to that of Obijwe in that there is both an affix that occurs between the verb and the person marker and a word that comes before the verb denoting negation. See [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ojibwe_grammar#Verbs Verb Conjugation in Ojibwe]. The Mi'gmaq negated affix is ''w'' or ''u'' which is very closely related to the Proto-Algonquian form for negation which is is ''*-w'' ( [http://kuscholarworks.ku.edu/dspace/bitstream/1808/440/1/ling.wp.v15.n2.paper6.pdf Proulx, 1990] ). ''w'' or ''u'' are very closely related phonetically since ''w'' is the semivowel corresponding to the vowel ''u''. Bear in mind that during the elicitation sessions, sometimes it was unsure whether to use ''w'' or ''u''.

Negation in Mi'gmaq consists of adding ''mu'' or ''ma'' then the verb conjugated in the negated verb form. After ''mu'' or ''ma'' the verb must always contain a negative particle. We must think of these two things as inseparable. ''mu'' always comes before the negative conjugated verb in the present or past, and ''ma'' always comes before future or if the prefix ''gis'' ('can', 'to be able to') is attached to the verb. All other prefixes abide by the rules ''mu'' before present or past and ''ma'' before future. There are other particles that take the negated form of the verb, but it is obvious that these particles express a negated idea.

Please note as well that in some of the studies on Mi'gmaq and Algonquian languages the term 'nonaffirmative' is used to describe the negated form. For consistency in this report, I will use the term 'negated' to indicate the form of the verb which is the opposite of affirmative. 'Nonaffirmative' and 'negated' however refer to the same process of negation.

= Conjugation of the Negated Verb =
I have selected the verb ''mijji'' (to eat). Please note that some resources spell this like ''mijji'' where other spell it ''miji'' ([http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED136614.pdf Micmac Teaching Grammar, 1976]). I have selected the spelling from [http://www.mikmaqonline.org/servlet/dictionaryFrameSet.html?arg0=mijjit&method=searchFromMikmaq the Migmaq talking dictionary]. It is also important to note that the Micmac Teaching Grammar uses an orthography that is different of all other orthographies used with Mi'gmaq. I will indicate which terms they are and give the Listuguj equivalent orthographical manner of writing them.

The simplified formula for the conjugation in the negated form: the base form + ''u'' or ''w'' + person ending ([http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED136614.pdf Micmac Teaching Grammar, 1976])
The base form for intransitive verbs is always the verb in the first person singular. For example I eat is ''mijji''. Now to create the second person singular we add the ending -''n'' denoting second person singular and get the form ''mijjin''. For another type of verb (henceforth referred to as the ''a'' verbs) we take the base form ''amalga-'' and add -''n'' to get ''amalgan'' (you dance) and to get the first person singular we add -''i''. Please note that it has been hypothesized that there are at least eleven different conjugations. We will only be dealing with a couple here. Because of reasons of time limitation, I was not able to elicit all eleven types but when there is a difference in conjugation, that will be noted. Note that in the plural the ''u'' or ''w'' comes after ''-ulti-''. This could be due the the fact that ''-ulti-'' is the plural affix that attaches to the base form of the verb and does not convey anything about the tense of the verb, rather it is used to denote that the verb is plural. Thus the ''u'' or ''w'' comes right before the tense marker which is always at the end of the verb. For the first person singular in present there is a null tense marker at the end of some verbs (for example the ''-i'' verbs) thus the negative marker is at the end.

== Present Tense ==
First is a comparison of the affirmative and negated paradigms of the verb ''mijji'' ('eat').

{| class="wikitable"
|+ mijji- 'eat'
|-
! scope="col" colspan="2"| ↓person / number→
! scope="col" | SG
! scope="col" | DU
! scope="col" | PL
|-
! scope="row" rowspan="2"| 1
! scope="row"| 13
| rowspan="2" | mijji
|mijjieg
|mijjultieg
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| mijji'gw
| mijjulti'gw
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2" | 2
| mijjin
| mijjioq
| mijjultioq
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2"| 3
| mijjit
| mijjijig
| mijjultijig
|-
|}

{| class="wikitable"
|+ mu mijji- 'not eat'
|-
! scope="col" colspan="2"| ↓person / number→
! scope="col" | SG
! scope="col" | DU
! scope="col" | PL
|-
! scope="row" rowspan="2"| 1
! scope="row"| 13
| rowspan="2" | mu mijjiw
| mu mijjiweg
| mu mijjultiweg
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| mu mijjigw
| mu mijjultigw
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2" | 2
| mu mijjiun
| mu mijjiwoq
| mu mijjultiwoq
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2"| 3
| mu mijjigw
| mu mijji'gw
| mu mijjulti'gw
|-
|}

The word ''mu'' signifies negation. When ''mu'' is in front of the verb, the verb must also be conjugated in the negative form. In the above table we see the intrusion of the sound ''u'', ''ew'' or ''w''. The following table illustrates the endings for the present negative tense, keeping in mind ''mu'' must ALWAYS come right before the negated verb. When ''mu'' precedes a verb it must ALWAYS be in the negated form.

Below is a table that summarizes the VAI -i stem negative person endings in present conjugation. Inanimate [IN] conjugation was taken from the Micmac Grammar (1976, pg 155).

{| class="wikitable"
|+ VAI -i stem negative present person endings
|-
! scope="col" colspan="2"| ↓person / number→
! scope="col" | SG
! scope="col" | DU
! scope="col" | PL
|-
! scope="row" rowspan="2"| 1
! scope="row"| 13
| rowspan="2" |-u
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2" | 2
| -
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2"| 3.AN
| -
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2"| 3.IN
| -
| -
| -
|-
|}

The forms for the first person dual and plural in the exclusive and inclusive forms are the same. As shown by other data, the dual form seems to be in the process of disappearing. This is one such example where the dual form does not exist for the plural first person. Some younger speakers do not use the dual form at all so it is not surprising that we find a gap in the dual form here. All this is according to the speaker but if we followed the pattern of the previous forms we would expect the dual form for the inclusive and exclusive first person to be ''-ieweg''. "When the verb is negated, then the -g third person is ALWAYS found" (Micmac Grammar, 1976 pg 93).

Below is a comparison of different verbs to give an idea of how to conjugate different types of verbs in the negated form. All forms are conjugated in the present singular third person animate. The form of -''elie-'' was taken from Micmac Grammar (pg 155). For more detail about these forms see [[VAI]].

{| class="wikitable"
! VAI stem || Base Form || Gloss || Affirmative || Gloss || Negated || Gloss
|-
| -i
| mijji-
| eat
| mijjit
| s/he eats
| mu mijjigw
| s/he does not eat
|-
| -a
| amalga-
| dance
| amalgat
| s/he dances
| mu amalgagw
| s/he does not dance
|-
| -a'si
| ala'si-
| go around
| ala'sit
| s/he goes around
| mu ala'sigw
| s/he does not go around
|-
| -e
| elie-
| go
| eliet
| s/he goes
| mu eliegw
| s/he does not go
|-
|}

For verb conjugations in the affirmative please see [http://firstnationhelp.com/ali/posters/pdf/verb_conjugation.pdf Mi'kmaq Verb Conjugation]. As you can see, this site uses the verb ''mijisi'' meaning 'to eat'. In Listuguj this is not used as the word for to eat because it sounds too close for the verb ''mejisi'' 'to excrete'.

=== Transitive ===
Below is the conjugation in present of a transitive verb that takes an inanimate object.

{| class="wikitable" style="text-align:center"
|+ VTI Conjugation Class 1: -m class
|-
! scope="col" | ↓subject / object→
! scope="col" | 0SG
! scope="col" | 0PL
|-
! scope="row" | 1
| malqutm
| malqutmann
|-
! scope="row" | 13
| malqutmeg
| malqutmegl
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| malqutmu'g
| malqutmu'gul
|-
! scope="row" | 2
| malqutmn
| malqutmnn
|-
! scope="row" | 2PL
| malqutmoq
| malqutmoqol
|-
! scope="row" | 3
| malqutmeg
| malqutmegl
|-
! scope="row" | 3PL
| malqutmi'tij
| malqutmi'titl
|}

{| class="wikitable" style="text-align:center"
|+ VTI Negative Conjugation Class 1: -m class
|-
! scope="col" | ↓subject / object→
! scope="col" | 0SG
! scope="col" | 0PL
|-
! scope="row" | 1
| mu malqutmu
| mu malqutmuann
|-
! scope="row" | 13
| mu malqutmueg
| mu malqutmuegl
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| mu malqutmugg
| mu malqutmuggul
|-
! scope="row" | 2
| mu malqutmu'n
| mu malqutmu'nn
|-
! scope="row" | 2PL
| mu malqutmuoq
| mu malqutmuoqol
|-
! scope="row" | 3
| mu malqutmug
| mu malqutmugul
|-
! scope="row" | 3PL
| mu malqutmi'tigw
| mu malqutmi'tigul
|-
|}

{| class="wikitable" style="text-align:center"
|+ VTI Negative Conjugation Class 1: -m class
|-
! scope="col" | ↓subject / object→
! scope="col" | 0SG
! scope="col" | 0PL
|-
! scope="row" | 1
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 13
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 12
|
|
|-
! scope="row" | 2
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 2PL
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 3
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 3PL
| -
| -
|-
|}

== Imperative ==
Here is the formation of the affirmative imperative:
{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijji-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 2 Second person
| mijji
| mijjigw
| mijjultigw
|-
|}

Now we compare it to the negated:
{| class="wikitable"
! ''mutt mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 2 Second person
| mutt mijjiw
| mutt mijjinew
| mutt mijjultinew
|-
|}

== Past Tense ==
Again for the past we compare the past and the negated past.

{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| mijjiap
| mijjieg'p
| mijjultieg'p
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| mijji'gup
| mijjulti'gup
|-
| 2 Second person
| mijjit'p
| mijjioqop
| mijjultioqop
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| mijjip
| mijjipni'g
| mijjultipni'g
|}

Now let us look at the negated forms.

{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| mu mijjiwap
| mu mijjiweg'p
| mu mijjultiweg'p
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| mu mijjiwgup
| mu mijjultiwgup/mijjultiggup
|-
| 2 Second person
| mu mijjiwt'p
| mu mijjiwoqop
| mu mijjultiwoqop
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| mu mijjigup
| mu mijjigupnig
| mu mijjultigupnig
|}

Thus this would be the conjugation of the negated form:

{| class="wikitable"
! Negated Past||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| -
| -
| -
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| -
| -
|-
| 2 Second person
| -
| -
| -
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| -
|
|
|}

For the third person the -''ug'p'' can change to -''weg'p'' for example:

<gl>
\gll Mu ala'ti-we-g'p
not go-NEG-SG.PAST
\trans She didn't go
</gl>

== Future Tense ==
First let us compare the affirmative tense for eat:

{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| mijjit's/mijjia's(List)
| mijjitesnen
| mijjultitesnen
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| mijjitesnu
| mijjultitesnu
|-
| 2 Second person
| mijjit'sg
| mijjitoqs'p
| mijjultitoqs'p
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| mijjitew
| mijjitaq
| mijjultitaq
|}
I was not able to elicit dual forms.

We compare the future affirmative with the negated below:

{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| ma' mijjiw
| ma' mijjiweg
| ma' mijjultiweg
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| ma' mijjigw
| ma' mijjultigw
|-
| 2 Second person
| ma' mijjiun
| ma' mijjiwoq
| ma' mijjultiwoq
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| ma' mijjigw
| ma' mijji'gw
| ma' mijjulti'gw
|}
NOTE: In the future the ''mu'' changes to ''ma' '' !! Like ''mu'', ''ma'' must always come before the verb conjugated in the negative future.
The correspondent was not able to produce a dual form in the future.

Now here is a paradigm of the negated endings in the future.

{| class="wikitable"
! Negated Future||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| -
| -
| -
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
|
| -
| -
|-
| 2 Second person
| -
|
|
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
|
|
|
|}

As you may have noticed the future tense is easy! The verbs take the same endings as the negated present tense but the ''mu'' is replaced with ''ma'' thus indicating future.

== When negation is used ==

When the verb is negated there must always find a negative particle (like ''mu'' or ''ma''). If not the sentence is ungrammatical as shown below:

<gl>
\gll *gis-wissugwatige-w
can-cook.1-NEG
\trans I cannot cook (intended meaning)
</gl>

The only form of the above sentence must be:

<gl>
\gll ma' gis-wissugwatige-w
NEG can-cook.1-NEG
\trans I cannot cook at this time
</gl>

<gl>
\gll mu gis-wissugwatige-w
can-cook.1-NEG
\trans I am unable to cook (something is preventing me from cooking)
</gl>

Thus it is seen that ''ma' '' comes before the verb, now making the sentence grammatical.

''ma' '' always precedes the future tense AND when the ''gis'' prefix is attached to the verb conjugated in the present for example:

<gl>
\gll ma' gis-amalga-w-g
NEG can-dance-NEG-3
\trans s/he cannot dance
</gl>

There are some expressions that always take the negative form of the verb such as ''me menga'' (not yet) and ''mowen'' (nobody) that take the negative form of the verb: (examples from [http://www.mikmaqonline.org/ Mi'gmaq Online Dictionary])

<gl>
\gll me' mnaq newt ajiegw
NEG yet one time-NEG-3
\trans it is not one o’clock yet
</gl>

<gl>
\gll mu-wen mijji-gw
NEG-who eat-NEG-3
\trans no one is eating
</gl>

<gl>
\gll mu goqwei eign-u-g
no thing be-NEG-3
\trans there is nothing there
</gl>

Below is a list of common particles after which the negated form is used. This list is not complete but these are the most common forms.

{| class="wikitable"
! Particle || When used || Translation
|-
| ''mu''
| before negated present and past
| not
|-
| ''mutt''
| before negated imperative
| do not
|-
| '''lpa mu''
| before negated present and past
| not even
|-
| ''mu wen''
| before negated present, past and future
| no one/nobody
|-
| ''mu goqwei'''
| before negated present, past and future
| nothing
|-
| ''me' mnaq''
| before negated verb
| not yet
|-
| ''ma' ''
| before negated future verb and preverb ''gis'' (can)
| not
|-
|}

''moqwa' goqwei'' is also spelled ''mu goqwei'' and a variant of this is ''mu'' + negated verb + ''goqwei'' when used in object position. It is inanimate. As in the following example:

<gl>
\gll mu malqutm-u goqwei
NEG eat.1>0-NEG what
\trans I eat nothing
</gl>

== Negative Concord ==
As can be seen above, Mi'gmaq is a negative concord language. Negative concord is where "double or multiple negative[s] [do] not express an affirmative but a negative" (van der Wouden & Zwarts, 1992). This is similar to French ''Je n'ai vue personne'' 'I have seen nobody' where both the ''ne'' and ''personne'' are both negative but the resulting sentence is negative, rather than each cancelling the other out resulting in a affirmative sentence, i.e. 'I have seen someone'. Mi'gmaq has negation marked in two places with both negative particles, i.e. ''mu'' & ''ma'', and a negative conjugation of the verb, i.e. with ''-u'' or ''-w'' added. Compare examples <glr id="1"/> and <glr id="2"/>.

<gl id="1">
\gll 'lpa'tuj eig'-p
boy be.there.PST-SG
\trans the boy was there
</gl>

<gl id="2">
\gll 'lpa'tuj mu eimu-g-u-p
boy NEG be.there-PST-NEG-SG
\trans the boy was not there
</gl>

= Word Order =
The negative particle (or possibly affix) ''mu'' always appears before the verb it negates. Although words can intervene between ''mu'' and the verb it negates, ''mu'' must always precede the verb.

<gl>
\gll Mali mu amal-gag-u-p
Mali NEG dance-PAST-NEG-SG
\trans Mali did not dance
</gl>

<gl>
\gll mu Mali amal-gag-u-p
NEG Mali dance-PAST-NEG-SG
\trans Mali did not dance
</gl>

Placement of ''mu'' post-verbally results in ungrammaticality, as illustrated below.

<gl>
\gll lpa'tuj mu eimug-u-p
boy NEG be.there.PST-NEG-SG
\trans the boy was not there
</gl>

Acceptable word orders:
*mu eimugup lpa'tuj
*mu lpa'tuj eimugup

Unacceptable word orders:
* *eimugup lpa'tuj mu
* *eimugup mu lpa'tuj
* *lpa'tuj eimugup mu

Furthermore, with regards to word order, it appears that negation must come right before the constituent it negates. Here is an example sentence without negation:

<gl>
\gll ula na lpa'tuj ta'n egitgup wigatign
this DEM boy that read.PST book
\trans this is the boy that read the book
</gl>

If we want to negate the first clause, as to say "This is '''not''' the boy that read the book", negation must directly precede 'boy'.

<gl>
\gll ula na mu lpa'tuj ta'n egitgup wigatign
this DEM NEG boy that read.PST book
\trans this is not the boy that read the book
</gl>

The following word orders for negation in the first clause are impossible:
* *ula na lpa'tuj mu...
* *ula mu na lpa'tuj...
* *mu ula na lpa'tuj...

If we want to negate the second clause, as to say "This is the boy that did '''not''' read the book", the word order may be varied, as long as negation comes before the verb (as discussed previously).

== Scope of Negation ==
As stated above, ''mu'' always comes before the verb. There may be particles that intrude between ''mu'' and the negated verb, but as long as ''mu'' comes before the negated verb, the structure is grammatical. [http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED136614.pdf Micmac Grammar, 1976] Sometimes the meaning of the sentence can change depending on the position of ''mu''.

<gl>
\gll egjitm Mali mu amal-gag-u-p
possible Mali NEG dance-PST-NEG-SG
\trans it is true that Mali did not dance
</gl>

<gl>
\gll mu egjitm Mali amal-gag-u-p
NEG possible Mali dance-PST.NEG.SG
\trans it is not true that Mali danced
</gl>

We would also expect phrases with adverb-like particles translatable as "it is possible" or "it is true" or "it is obvious" would also vary regarding negation.

=Language change and negation=
Often I was not able to elicit both the dual and plural forms of a verb. There are many times when I could only elicit the dual form, or times when the dual and plural forms were the same. It has been noted by our consultants that younger speakers are not using the plural forms but are using the dual form to mean both dual and plural. This seems be a language change happening currently in the speech community where the younger generation is leading the change. As noted in the paradigm above for 'eat' in the negated present tense, both dual and plural forms are the same. Here it seems that the plural form is used for both dual and plural meanings. This would strongly suggest a change happening in the speech community.

=References=
Clark, Jeremiah S. "A Dictionary of the Micmac Language." Rand's Micmac Dictionary. Charlottetown, PEI: The Patriot Publishing Company, 1902. Print.

Delisle, Gill L., and Manny L. Metallic. Micmac Teaching Grammar. Ecowi, QC: Thunderbird Press, 1976. Print.

L'Abbe Maillard, M. Grammaire De La Langue Mikmaque. New York: Presse Cramoisy de Jean-Marie Shea, 1864. Print.

Metallic, Janine. "Mi'gmaq Elicitation Session for Field Methods of Linguistics." Ed. Class, Carol Little and LING415. Montreal, QC: n/a, 2011. Print.

Payne, Thomas Edward. Describing Morphosyntax: a Guide for Field Linguists. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge UP, 2008. Print.

Paul-Martin, Patsy. "Mi'kmaq Verb Conjugation." Ed. Orthography, Mi'kmaq Talking Posters Smith/Francis. Truto, NS: Eastern Woodland Print Communications, 2011. Print.

Proulx, Paul. "Proto-Algonquian Verb Inflection." Studies in Native American Languages 15.2 (1990): 100-45. Print.

van der Wouden, Ton, and Frans Zwarts. "Negative Concord." D. Gilbers and S. Looyenga (eds), Language and Cognition 2. Yearbook 1992 Linguistic Theory and Knowledge Representation of the University of Groningen (1992): 317-31. Print.

Negation

2014-08-07T19:10:25Z

Carol: /* When negation is used */

=Introduction=
Negation is the process of turning affirmative statements into the opposite form. For example, the negative equivalent of affirmative sentence, ''I am eating'' is ''I am not eating''. In English there are a few processes at work. ''not'' must always come with an auxiliary verb like the verb 'to have' and 'to be'. In Mi'gmaq, with its extremely detailed and expansive verb conjugations in the present, it is not surprising that the negated conjugation of verbs is just as detailed and expansive as they are in the affirmative.

To start off any commentary on negation, it seems fitting to start of with the word "no" which is ''moqwa'' in Mi'gmaq. (The opposite of this is ''e'e'' , meaning "yes".) Negation in Mi'gmaq is similar to that of Obijwe in that there is both an affix that occurs between the verb and the person marker and a word that comes before the verb denoting negation. See [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ojibwe_grammar#Verbs Verb Conjugation in Ojibwe]. The Mi'gmaq negated affix is ''w'' or ''u'' which is very closely related to the Proto-Algonquian form for negation which is is ''*-w'' ( [http://kuscholarworks.ku.edu/dspace/bitstream/1808/440/1/ling.wp.v15.n2.paper6.pdf Proulx, 1990] ). ''w'' or ''u'' are very closely related phonetically since ''w'' is the semivowel corresponding to the vowel ''u''. Bear in mind that during the elicitation sessions, sometimes it was unsure whether to use ''w'' or ''u''.

Negation in Mi'gmaq consists of adding ''mu'' or ''ma'' then the verb conjugated in the negated verb form. After ''mu'' or ''ma'' the verb must always contain a negative particle. We must think of these two things as inseparable. ''mu'' always comes before the negative conjugated verb in the present or past, and ''ma'' always comes before future or if the prefix ''gis'' ('can', 'to be able to') is attached to the verb. All other prefixes abide by the rules ''mu'' before present or past and ''ma'' before future. There are other particles that take the negated form of the verb, but it is obvious that these particles express a negated idea.

Please note as well that in some of the studies on Mi'gmaq and Algonquian languages the term 'nonaffirmative' is used to describe the negated form. For consistency in this report, I will use the term 'negated' to indicate the form of the verb which is the opposite of affirmative. 'Nonaffirmative' and 'negated' however refer to the same process of negation.

= Conjugation of the Negated Verb =
I have selected the verb ''mijji'' (to eat). Please note that some resources spell this like ''mijji'' where other spell it ''miji'' ([http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED136614.pdf Micmac Teaching Grammar, 1976]). I have selected the spelling from [http://www.mikmaqonline.org/servlet/dictionaryFrameSet.html?arg0=mijjit&method=searchFromMikmaq the Migmaq talking dictionary]. It is also important to note that the Micmac Teaching Grammar uses an orthography that is different of all other orthographies used with Mi'gmaq. I will indicate which terms they are and give the Listuguj equivalent orthographical manner of writing them.

The simplified formula for the conjugation in the negated form: the base form + ''u'' or ''w'' + person ending ([http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED136614.pdf Micmac Teaching Grammar, 1976])
The base form for intransitive verbs is always the verb in the first person singular. For example I eat is ''mijji''. Now to create the second person singular we add the ending -''n'' denoting second person singular and get the form ''mijjin''. For another type of verb (henceforth referred to as the ''a'' verbs) we take the base form ''amalga-'' and add -''n'' to get ''amalgan'' (you dance) and to get the first person singular we add -''i''. Please note that it has been hypothesized that there are at least eleven different conjugations. We will only be dealing with a couple here. Because of reasons of time limitation, I was not able to elicit all eleven types but when there is a difference in conjugation, that will be noted. Note that in the plural the ''u'' or ''w'' comes after ''-ulti-''. This could be due the the fact that ''-ulti-'' is the plural affix that attaches to the base form of the verb and does not convey anything about the tense of the verb, rather it is used to denote that the verb is plural. Thus the ''u'' or ''w'' comes right before the tense marker which is always at the end of the verb. For the first person singular in present there is a null tense marker at the end of some verbs (for example the ''-i'' verbs) thus the negative marker is at the end.

== Present Tense ==
First is a comparison of the affirmative and negated paradigms of the verb ''mijji'' ('eat').

{| class="wikitable"
|+ mijji- 'eat'
|-
! scope="col" colspan="2"| ↓person / number→
! scope="col" | SG
! scope="col" | DU
! scope="col" | PL
|-
! scope="row" rowspan="2"| 1
! scope="row"| 13
| rowspan="2" | mijji
|mijjieg
|mijjultieg
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| mijji'gw
| mijjulti'gw
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2" | 2
| mijjin
| mijjioq
| mijjultioq
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2"| 3
| mijjit
| mijjijig
| mijjultijig
|-
|}

{| class="wikitable"
|+ mu mijji- 'not eat'
|-
! scope="col" colspan="2"| ↓person / number→
! scope="col" | SG
! scope="col" | DU
! scope="col" | PL
|-
! scope="row" rowspan="2"| 1
! scope="row"| 13
| rowspan="2" | mu mijjiw
| mu mijjiweg
| mu mijjultiweg
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| mu mijjigw
| mu mijjultigw
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2" | 2
| mu mijjiun
| mu mijjiwoq
| mu mijjultiwoq
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2"| 3
| mu mijjigw
| mu mijji'gw
| mu mijjulti'gw
|-
|}

The word ''mu'' signifies negation. When ''mu'' is in front of the verb, the verb must also be conjugated in the negative form. In the above table we see the intrusion of the sound ''u'', ''ew'' or ''w''. The following table illustrates the endings for the present negative tense, keeping in mind ''mu'' must ALWAYS come right before the negated verb. When ''mu'' precedes a verb it must ALWAYS be in the negated form.

Below is a table that summarizes the VAI -i stem negative person endings in present conjugation. Inanimate [IN] conjugation was taken from the Micmac Grammar (1976, pg 155).

{| class="wikitable"
|+ VAI -i stem negative present person endings
|-
! scope="col" colspan="2"| ↓person / number→
! scope="col" | SG
! scope="col" | DU
! scope="col" | PL
|-
! scope="row" rowspan="2"| 1
! scope="row"| 13
| rowspan="2" |-u
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2" | 2
| -
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2"| 3.AN
| -
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2"| 3.IN
| -
| -
| -
|-
|}

The forms for the first person dual and plural in the exclusive and inclusive forms are the same. As shown by other data, the dual form seems to be in the process of disappearing. This is one such example where the dual form does not exist for the plural first person. Some younger speakers do not use the dual form at all so it is not surprising that we find a gap in the dual form here. All this is according to the speaker but if we followed the pattern of the previous forms we would expect the dual form for the inclusive and exclusive first person to be ''-ieweg''. "When the verb is negated, then the -g third person is ALWAYS found" (Micmac Grammar, 1976 pg 93).

Below is a comparison of different verbs to give an idea of how to conjugate different types of verbs in the negated form. All forms are conjugated in the present singular third person animate. The form of -''elie-'' was taken from Micmac Grammar (pg 155). For more detail about these forms see [[VAI]].

{| class="wikitable"
! VAI stem || Base Form || Gloss || Affirmative || Gloss || Negated || Gloss
|-
| -i
| mijji-
| eat
| mijjit
| s/he eats
| mu mijjigw
| s/he does not eat
|-
| -a
| amalga-
| dance
| amalgat
| s/he dances
| mu amalgagw
| s/he does not dance
|-
| -a'si
| ala'si-
| go around
| ala'sit
| s/he goes around
| mu ala'sigw
| s/he does not go around
|-
| -e
| elie-
| go
| eliet
| s/he goes
| mu eliegw
| s/he does not go
|-
|}

For verb conjugations in the affirmative please see [http://firstnationhelp.com/ali/posters/pdf/verb_conjugation.pdf Mi'kmaq Verb Conjugation]. As you can see, this site uses the verb ''mijisi'' meaning 'to eat'. In Listuguj this is not used as the word for to eat because it sounds too close for the verb ''mejisi'' 'to excrete'.

=== Transitive ===
Below is the conjugation in present of a transitive verb that takes an inanimate object.

{| class="wikitable" style="text-align:center"
|+ VTI Conjugation Class 1: -m class
|-
! scope="col" | ↓subject / object→
! scope="col" | 0SG
! scope="col" | 0PL
|-
! scope="row" | 1
| malqutm
| malqutmann
|-
! scope="row" | 13
| malqutmeg
| malqutmegl
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| malqutmu'g
| malqutmu'gul
|-
! scope="row" | 2
| malqutmn
| malqutmnn
|-
! scope="row" | 2PL
| malqutmoq
| malqutmoqol
|-
! scope="row" | 3
| malqutmeg
| malqutmegl
|-
! scope="row" | 3PL
| malqutmi'tij
| malqutmi'titl
|}

{| class="wikitable" style="text-align:center"
|+ VTI Negative Conjugation Class 1: -m class
|-
! scope="col" | ↓subject / object→
! scope="col" | 0SG
! scope="col" | 0PL
|-
! scope="row" | 1
| mu malqutmu
| mu malqutmuann
|-
! scope="row" | 13
| mu malqutmueg
| mu malqutmuegl
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| mu malqutmugg
| mu malqutmuggul
|-
! scope="row" | 2
| mu malqutmu'n
| mu malqutmu'nn
|-
! scope="row" | 2PL
| mu malqutmuoq
| mu malqutmuoqol
|-
! scope="row" | 3
| mu malqutmug
| mu malqutmugul
|-
! scope="row" | 3PL
| mu malqutmi'tigw
| mu malqutmi'tigul
|-
|}

{| class="wikitable" style="text-align:center"
|+ VTI Negative Conjugation Class 1: -m class
|-
! scope="col" | ↓subject / object→
! scope="col" | 0SG
! scope="col" | 0PL
|-
! scope="row" | 1
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 13
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 12
|
|
|-
! scope="row" | 2
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 2PL
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 3
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 3PL
| -
| -
|-
|}

== Imperative ==
Here is the formation of the affirmative imperative:
{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijji-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 2 Second person
| mijji
| mijjigw
| mijjultigw
|-
|}

Now we compare it to the negated:
{| class="wikitable"
! ''mutt mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 2 Second person
| mutt mijjiw
| mutt mijjinew
| mutt mijjultinew
|-
|}

== Past Tense ==
Again for the past we compare the past and the negated past.

{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| mijjiap
| mijjieg'p
| mijjultieg'p
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| mijji'gup
| mijjulti'gup
|-
| 2 Second person
| mijjit'p
| mijjioqop
| mijjultioqop
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| mijjip
| mijjipni'g
| mijjultipni'g
|}

Now let us look at the negated forms.

{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| mu mijjiwap
| mu mijjiweg'p
| mu mijjultiweg'p
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| mu mijjiwgup
| mu mijjultiwgup/mijjultiggup
|-
| 2 Second person
| mu mijjiwt'p
| mu mijjiwoqop
| mu mijjultiwoqop
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| mu mijjigup
| mu mijjigupnig
| mu mijjultigupnig
|}

Thus this would be the conjugation of the negated form:

{| class="wikitable"
! Negated Past||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| -
| -
| -
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| -
| -
|-
| 2 Second person
| -
| -
| -
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| -
|
|
|}

For the third person the -''ug'p'' can change to -''weg'p'' for example:

<gl>
\gll Mu ala'ti-we-g'p
not go-NEG-SG.PAST
\trans She didn't go
</gl>

== Future Tense ==
First let us compare the affirmative tense for eat:

{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| mijjit's/mijjia's(List)
| mijjitesnen
| mijjultitesnen
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| mijjitesnu
| mijjultitesnu
|-
| 2 Second person
| mijjit'sg
| mijjitoqs'p
| mijjultitoqs'p
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| mijjitew
| mijjitaq
| mijjultitaq
|}
I was not able to elicit dual forms.

We compare the future affirmative with the negated below:

{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| ma' mijjiw
| ma' mijjiweg
| ma' mijjultiweg
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| ma' mijjigw
| ma' mijjultigw
|-
| 2 Second person
| ma' mijjiun
| ma' mijjiwoq
| ma' mijjultiwoq
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| ma' mijjigw
| ma' mijji'gw
| ma' mijjulti'gw
|}
NOTE: In the future the ''mu'' changes to ''ma' '' !! Like ''mu'', ''ma'' must always come before the verb conjugated in the negative future.
The correspondent was not able to produce a dual form in the future.

Now here is a paradigm of the negated endings in the future.

{| class="wikitable"
! Negated Future||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| -
| -
| -
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
|
| -
| -
|-
| 2 Second person
| -
|
|
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
|
|
|
|}

As you may have noticed the future tense is easy! The verbs take the same endings as the negated present tense but the ''mu'' is replaced with ''ma'' thus indicating future.

== When negation is used ==

When the verb is negated there must always find a negative particle (like ''mu'' or ''ma''). If not the sentence is ungrammatical as shown below:

<gl>
\gll *gis-wissugwatige-w
can-cook.1-NEG
\trans I cannot cook (intended meaning)
</gl>

The only form of the above sentence must be:

<gl>
\gll ma' gis-wissugwatige-w
NEG can-cook.1-NEG
\trans I cannot cook at this time
</gl>

<gl>
\gll mu gis-wissugwatige-w
can-cook.1-NEG
\trans I am unable to cook (something is preventing me from cooking)
</gl>

Thus it is seen that ''ma' '' comes before the verb, now making the sentence grammatical.

''ma' '' always precedes the future tense AND when the ''gis'' prefix is attached to the verb conjugated in the present for example:

<gl>
\gll ma' gis-amalga-w-g
NEG can-dance-NEG-3
\trans s/he cannot dance
</gl>

There are some expressions that always take the negative form of the verb such as ''me menga'' (not yet) and ''mowen'' (nobody) that take the negative form of the verb: (examples from [http://www.mikmaqonline.org/ Mi'gmaq Online Dictionary])

<gl>
\gll me' mnaq newt ajiegw
NEG yet one time-NEG-3
\trans it is not one o’clock yet
</gl>

<gl>
\gll mu-wen mijji-gw
NEG-who eat-NEG-3
\trans no one is eating
</gl>

<gl>
\gll mu goqwei eign-u-g
no thing be-NEG-3
\trans there is nothing there
</gl>

Below is a list of common particles after which the negated form is used. This list is not complete but these are the most common forms.

{| class="wikitable"
! Particle || When used || Translation
|-
| ''mu''
| before negated present and past
| not
|-
| ''mutt''
| before negated imperative
| do not
|-
| '''lpa mu''
| before negated present and past
| not even
|-
| ''mu wen''
| before negated present, past and future
| no one/nobody
|-
| ''mu goqwei'''
| before negated present, past and future
| nothing
|-
| ''me' mnaq''
| before negated verb
| not yet
|-
| ''ma' ''
| before negated future verb and preverb ''gis'' (can)
| not
|-
|}

''moqwa' goqwei'' is also spelled ''mu goqwei'' and a variant of this is ''mu'' + negated verb + ''goqwei'' when used in object position. It is inanimate. As in the following example:

<gl>
\gll mu malqutm-u goqwei
NEG eat.1>0-NEG what
\trans I eat nothing
</gl>

== Negative Concord ==
As can be seen above, Mi'gmaq is a negative concord language. Negative concord is where "double or multiple negative[s] [do] not express an affirmative but a negative" (van der Wouden & Zwarts, 1992). This is similar to French ''Je n'ai vue personne'' 'I have seen nobody' where both the ''ne'' and ''personne'' are both negative but the resulting sentence is negative, rather than each cancelling the other out resulting in a affirmative sentence, i.e. 'I have seen someone'. Mi'gmaq has negation marked in two places with both negative particles, i.e. ''mu'' & ''ma'', and a negative conjugation of the verb, i.e. with ''-u'' or ''-w'' added. Compare examples <glr id="1"/> and <glr id="2"/>.

<gl id="1">
\gll lpa'tuj eigu-p
boy be.there.PST-SG
\trans the boy was there
</gl>

<gl id="2">
\gll lpa'tuj mu eimu-g-u-p
boy NEG be.there-PST-NEG-SG
\trans the boy was not there
</gl>

= Word Order =
The negative particle (or possibly affix) ''mu'' always appears before the verb it negates. Although words can intervene between ''mu'' and the verb it negates, ''mu'' must always precede the verb.

<gl>
\gll Mali mu amal-gag-u-p
Mali NEG dance-PAST-NEG-SG
\trans Mali did not dance
</gl>

<gl>
\gll mu Mali amal-gag-u-p
NEG Mali dance-PAST-NEG-SG
\trans Mali did not dance
</gl>

Placement of ''mu'' post-verbally results in ungrammaticality, as illustrated below.

<gl>
\gll lpa'tuj mu eimug-u-p
boy NEG be.there.PST-NEG-SG
\trans the boy was not there
</gl>

Acceptable word orders:
*mu eimugup lpa'tuj
*mu lpa'tuj eimugup

Unacceptable word orders:
* *eimugup lpa'tuj mu
* *eimugup mu lpa'tuj
* *lpa'tuj eimugup mu

Furthermore, with regards to word order, it appears that negation must come right before the constituent it negates. Here is an example sentence without negation:

<gl>
\gll ula na lpa'tuj ta'n egitgup wigatign
this DEM boy that read.PST book
\trans this is the boy that read the book
</gl>

If we want to negate the first clause, as to say "This is '''not''' the boy that read the book", negation must directly precede 'boy'.

<gl>
\gll ula na mu lpa'tuj ta'n egitgup wigatign
this DEM NEG boy that read.PST book
\trans this is not the boy that read the book
</gl>

The following word orders for negation in the first clause are impossible:
* *ula na lpa'tuj mu...
* *ula mu na lpa'tuj...
* *mu ula na lpa'tuj...

If we want to negate the second clause, as to say "This is the boy that did '''not''' read the book", the word order may be varied, as long as negation comes before the verb (as discussed previously).

== Scope of Negation ==
As stated above, ''mu'' always comes before the verb. There may be particles that intrude between ''mu'' and the negated verb, but as long as ''mu'' comes before the negated verb, the structure is grammatical. [http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED136614.pdf Micmac Grammar, 1976] Sometimes the meaning of the sentence can change depending on the position of ''mu''.

<gl>
\gll egjitm Mali mu amal-gag-u-p
possible Mali NEG dance-PST-NEG-SG
\trans it is true that Mali did not dance
</gl>

<gl>
\gll mu egjitm Mali amal-gag-u-p
NEG possible Mali dance-PST.NEG.SG
\trans it is not true that Mali danced
</gl>

We would also expect phrases with adverb-like particles translatable as "it is possible" or "it is true" or "it is obvious" would also vary regarding negation.

=Language change and negation=
Often I was not able to elicit both the dual and plural forms of a verb. There are many times when I could only elicit the dual form, or times when the dual and plural forms were the same. It has been noted by our consultants that younger speakers are not using the plural forms but are using the dual form to mean both dual and plural. This seems be a language change happening currently in the speech community where the younger generation is leading the change. As noted in the paradigm above for 'eat' in the negated present tense, both dual and plural forms are the same. Here it seems that the plural form is used for both dual and plural meanings. This would strongly suggest a change happening in the speech community.

=References=
Clark, Jeremiah S. "A Dictionary of the Micmac Language." Rand's Micmac Dictionary. Charlottetown, PEI: The Patriot Publishing Company, 1902. Print.

Delisle, Gill L., and Manny L. Metallic. Micmac Teaching Grammar. Ecowi, QC: Thunderbird Press, 1976. Print.

L'Abbe Maillard, M. Grammaire De La Langue Mikmaque. New York: Presse Cramoisy de Jean-Marie Shea, 1864. Print.

Metallic, Janine. "Mi'gmaq Elicitation Session for Field Methods of Linguistics." Ed. Class, Carol Little and LING415. Montreal, QC: n/a, 2011. Print.

Payne, Thomas Edward. Describing Morphosyntax: a Guide for Field Linguists. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge UP, 2008. Print.

Paul-Martin, Patsy. "Mi'kmaq Verb Conjugation." Ed. Orthography, Mi'kmaq Talking Posters Smith/Francis. Truto, NS: Eastern Woodland Print Communications, 2011. Print.

Proulx, Paul. "Proto-Algonquian Verb Inflection." Studies in Native American Languages 15.2 (1990): 100-45. Print.

van der Wouden, Ton, and Frans Zwarts. "Negative Concord." D. Gilbers and S. Looyenga (eds), Language and Cognition 2. Yearbook 1992 Linguistic Theory and Knowledge Representation of the University of Groningen (1992): 317-31. Print.

Negation

2014-08-07T19:10:05Z

Carol: /* When negation is used */

=Introduction=
Negation is the process of turning affirmative statements into the opposite form. For example, the negative equivalent of affirmative sentence, ''I am eating'' is ''I am not eating''. In English there are a few processes at work. ''not'' must always come with an auxiliary verb like the verb 'to have' and 'to be'. In Mi'gmaq, with its extremely detailed and expansive verb conjugations in the present, it is not surprising that the negated conjugation of verbs is just as detailed and expansive as they are in the affirmative.

To start off any commentary on negation, it seems fitting to start of with the word "no" which is ''moqwa'' in Mi'gmaq. (The opposite of this is ''e'e'' , meaning "yes".) Negation in Mi'gmaq is similar to that of Obijwe in that there is both an affix that occurs between the verb and the person marker and a word that comes before the verb denoting negation. See [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ojibwe_grammar#Verbs Verb Conjugation in Ojibwe]. The Mi'gmaq negated affix is ''w'' or ''u'' which is very closely related to the Proto-Algonquian form for negation which is is ''*-w'' ( [http://kuscholarworks.ku.edu/dspace/bitstream/1808/440/1/ling.wp.v15.n2.paper6.pdf Proulx, 1990] ). ''w'' or ''u'' are very closely related phonetically since ''w'' is the semivowel corresponding to the vowel ''u''. Bear in mind that during the elicitation sessions, sometimes it was unsure whether to use ''w'' or ''u''.

Negation in Mi'gmaq consists of adding ''mu'' or ''ma'' then the verb conjugated in the negated verb form. After ''mu'' or ''ma'' the verb must always contain a negative particle. We must think of these two things as inseparable. ''mu'' always comes before the negative conjugated verb in the present or past, and ''ma'' always comes before future or if the prefix ''gis'' ('can', 'to be able to') is attached to the verb. All other prefixes abide by the rules ''mu'' before present or past and ''ma'' before future. There are other particles that take the negated form of the verb, but it is obvious that these particles express a negated idea.

Please note as well that in some of the studies on Mi'gmaq and Algonquian languages the term 'nonaffirmative' is used to describe the negated form. For consistency in this report, I will use the term 'negated' to indicate the form of the verb which is the opposite of affirmative. 'Nonaffirmative' and 'negated' however refer to the same process of negation.

= Conjugation of the Negated Verb =
I have selected the verb ''mijji'' (to eat). Please note that some resources spell this like ''mijji'' where other spell it ''miji'' ([http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED136614.pdf Micmac Teaching Grammar, 1976]). I have selected the spelling from [http://www.mikmaqonline.org/servlet/dictionaryFrameSet.html?arg0=mijjit&method=searchFromMikmaq the Migmaq talking dictionary]. It is also important to note that the Micmac Teaching Grammar uses an orthography that is different of all other orthographies used with Mi'gmaq. I will indicate which terms they are and give the Listuguj equivalent orthographical manner of writing them.

The simplified formula for the conjugation in the negated form: the base form + ''u'' or ''w'' + person ending ([http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED136614.pdf Micmac Teaching Grammar, 1976])
The base form for intransitive verbs is always the verb in the first person singular. For example I eat is ''mijji''. Now to create the second person singular we add the ending -''n'' denoting second person singular and get the form ''mijjin''. For another type of verb (henceforth referred to as the ''a'' verbs) we take the base form ''amalga-'' and add -''n'' to get ''amalgan'' (you dance) and to get the first person singular we add -''i''. Please note that it has been hypothesized that there are at least eleven different conjugations. We will only be dealing with a couple here. Because of reasons of time limitation, I was not able to elicit all eleven types but when there is a difference in conjugation, that will be noted. Note that in the plural the ''u'' or ''w'' comes after ''-ulti-''. This could be due the the fact that ''-ulti-'' is the plural affix that attaches to the base form of the verb and does not convey anything about the tense of the verb, rather it is used to denote that the verb is plural. Thus the ''u'' or ''w'' comes right before the tense marker which is always at the end of the verb. For the first person singular in present there is a null tense marker at the end of some verbs (for example the ''-i'' verbs) thus the negative marker is at the end.

== Present Tense ==
First is a comparison of the affirmative and negated paradigms of the verb ''mijji'' ('eat').

{| class="wikitable"
|+ mijji- 'eat'
|-
! scope="col" colspan="2"| ↓person / number→
! scope="col" | SG
! scope="col" | DU
! scope="col" | PL
|-
! scope="row" rowspan="2"| 1
! scope="row"| 13
| rowspan="2" | mijji
|mijjieg
|mijjultieg
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| mijji'gw
| mijjulti'gw
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2" | 2
| mijjin
| mijjioq
| mijjultioq
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2"| 3
| mijjit
| mijjijig
| mijjultijig
|-
|}

{| class="wikitable"
|+ mu mijji- 'not eat'
|-
! scope="col" colspan="2"| ↓person / number→
! scope="col" | SG
! scope="col" | DU
! scope="col" | PL
|-
! scope="row" rowspan="2"| 1
! scope="row"| 13
| rowspan="2" | mu mijjiw
| mu mijjiweg
| mu mijjultiweg
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| mu mijjigw
| mu mijjultigw
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2" | 2
| mu mijjiun
| mu mijjiwoq
| mu mijjultiwoq
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2"| 3
| mu mijjigw
| mu mijji'gw
| mu mijjulti'gw
|-
|}

The word ''mu'' signifies negation. When ''mu'' is in front of the verb, the verb must also be conjugated in the negative form. In the above table we see the intrusion of the sound ''u'', ''ew'' or ''w''. The following table illustrates the endings for the present negative tense, keeping in mind ''mu'' must ALWAYS come right before the negated verb. When ''mu'' precedes a verb it must ALWAYS be in the negated form.

Below is a table that summarizes the VAI -i stem negative person endings in present conjugation. Inanimate [IN] conjugation was taken from the Micmac Grammar (1976, pg 155).

{| class="wikitable"
|+ VAI -i stem negative present person endings
|-
! scope="col" colspan="2"| ↓person / number→
! scope="col" | SG
! scope="col" | DU
! scope="col" | PL
|-
! scope="row" rowspan="2"| 1
! scope="row"| 13
| rowspan="2" |-u
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2" | 2
| -
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2"| 3.AN
| -
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2"| 3.IN
| -
| -
| -
|-
|}

The forms for the first person dual and plural in the exclusive and inclusive forms are the same. As shown by other data, the dual form seems to be in the process of disappearing. This is one such example where the dual form does not exist for the plural first person. Some younger speakers do not use the dual form at all so it is not surprising that we find a gap in the dual form here. All this is according to the speaker but if we followed the pattern of the previous forms we would expect the dual form for the inclusive and exclusive first person to be ''-ieweg''. "When the verb is negated, then the -g third person is ALWAYS found" (Micmac Grammar, 1976 pg 93).

Below is a comparison of different verbs to give an idea of how to conjugate different types of verbs in the negated form. All forms are conjugated in the present singular third person animate. The form of -''elie-'' was taken from Micmac Grammar (pg 155). For more detail about these forms see [[VAI]].

{| class="wikitable"
! VAI stem || Base Form || Gloss || Affirmative || Gloss || Negated || Gloss
|-
| -i
| mijji-
| eat
| mijjit
| s/he eats
| mu mijjigw
| s/he does not eat
|-
| -a
| amalga-
| dance
| amalgat
| s/he dances
| mu amalgagw
| s/he does not dance
|-
| -a'si
| ala'si-
| go around
| ala'sit
| s/he goes around
| mu ala'sigw
| s/he does not go around
|-
| -e
| elie-
| go
| eliet
| s/he goes
| mu eliegw
| s/he does not go
|-
|}

For verb conjugations in the affirmative please see [http://firstnationhelp.com/ali/posters/pdf/verb_conjugation.pdf Mi'kmaq Verb Conjugation]. As you can see, this site uses the verb ''mijisi'' meaning 'to eat'. In Listuguj this is not used as the word for to eat because it sounds too close for the verb ''mejisi'' 'to excrete'.

=== Transitive ===
Below is the conjugation in present of a transitive verb that takes an inanimate object.

{| class="wikitable" style="text-align:center"
|+ VTI Conjugation Class 1: -m class
|-
! scope="col" | ↓subject / object→
! scope="col" | 0SG
! scope="col" | 0PL
|-
! scope="row" | 1
| malqutm
| malqutmann
|-
! scope="row" | 13
| malqutmeg
| malqutmegl
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| malqutmu'g
| malqutmu'gul
|-
! scope="row" | 2
| malqutmn
| malqutmnn
|-
! scope="row" | 2PL
| malqutmoq
| malqutmoqol
|-
! scope="row" | 3
| malqutmeg
| malqutmegl
|-
! scope="row" | 3PL
| malqutmi'tij
| malqutmi'titl
|}

{| class="wikitable" style="text-align:center"
|+ VTI Negative Conjugation Class 1: -m class
|-
! scope="col" | ↓subject / object→
! scope="col" | 0SG
! scope="col" | 0PL
|-
! scope="row" | 1
| mu malqutmu
| mu malqutmuann
|-
! scope="row" | 13
| mu malqutmueg
| mu malqutmuegl
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| mu malqutmugg
| mu malqutmuggul
|-
! scope="row" | 2
| mu malqutmu'n
| mu malqutmu'nn
|-
! scope="row" | 2PL
| mu malqutmuoq
| mu malqutmuoqol
|-
! scope="row" | 3
| mu malqutmug
| mu malqutmugul
|-
! scope="row" | 3PL
| mu malqutmi'tigw
| mu malqutmi'tigul
|-
|}

{| class="wikitable" style="text-align:center"
|+ VTI Negative Conjugation Class 1: -m class
|-
! scope="col" | ↓subject / object→
! scope="col" | 0SG
! scope="col" | 0PL
|-
! scope="row" | 1
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 13
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 12
|
|
|-
! scope="row" | 2
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 2PL
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 3
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 3PL
| -
| -
|-
|}

== Imperative ==
Here is the formation of the affirmative imperative:
{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijji-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 2 Second person
| mijji
| mijjigw
| mijjultigw
|-
|}

Now we compare it to the negated:
{| class="wikitable"
! ''mutt mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 2 Second person
| mutt mijjiw
| mutt mijjinew
| mutt mijjultinew
|-
|}

== Past Tense ==
Again for the past we compare the past and the negated past.

{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| mijjiap
| mijjieg'p
| mijjultieg'p
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| mijji'gup
| mijjulti'gup
|-
| 2 Second person
| mijjit'p
| mijjioqop
| mijjultioqop
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| mijjip
| mijjipni'g
| mijjultipni'g
|}

Now let us look at the negated forms.

{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| mu mijjiwap
| mu mijjiweg'p
| mu mijjultiweg'p
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| mu mijjiwgup
| mu mijjultiwgup/mijjultiggup
|-
| 2 Second person
| mu mijjiwt'p
| mu mijjiwoqop
| mu mijjultiwoqop
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| mu mijjigup
| mu mijjigupnig
| mu mijjultigupnig
|}

Thus this would be the conjugation of the negated form:

{| class="wikitable"
! Negated Past||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| -
| -
| -
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| -
| -
|-
| 2 Second person
| -
| -
| -
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| -
|
|
|}

For the third person the -''ug'p'' can change to -''weg'p'' for example:

<gl>
\gll Mu ala'ti-we-g'p
not go-NEG-SG.PAST
\trans She didn't go
</gl>

== Future Tense ==
First let us compare the affirmative tense for eat:

{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| mijjit's/mijjia's(List)
| mijjitesnen
| mijjultitesnen
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| mijjitesnu
| mijjultitesnu
|-
| 2 Second person
| mijjit'sg
| mijjitoqs'p
| mijjultitoqs'p
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| mijjitew
| mijjitaq
| mijjultitaq
|}
I was not able to elicit dual forms.

We compare the future affirmative with the negated below:

{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| ma' mijjiw
| ma' mijjiweg
| ma' mijjultiweg
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| ma' mijjigw
| ma' mijjultigw
|-
| 2 Second person
| ma' mijjiun
| ma' mijjiwoq
| ma' mijjultiwoq
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| ma' mijjigw
| ma' mijji'gw
| ma' mijjulti'gw
|}
NOTE: In the future the ''mu'' changes to ''ma' '' !! Like ''mu'', ''ma'' must always come before the verb conjugated in the negative future.
The correspondent was not able to produce a dual form in the future.

Now here is a paradigm of the negated endings in the future.

{| class="wikitable"
! Negated Future||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| -
| -
| -
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
|
| -
| -
|-
| 2 Second person
| -
|
|
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
|
|
|
|}

As you may have noticed the future tense is easy! The verbs take the same endings as the negated present tense but the ''mu'' is replaced with ''ma'' thus indicating future.

== When negation is used ==

When the verb is negated there must always find a negative particle (like ''mu'' or ''ma''). If not the sentence is ungrammatical as shown below:

<gl>
\gll *gis-wissugwatige-w
can-cook.1-NEG
\trans I cannot cook (intended meaning)
</gl>

The only form of the above sentence must be:

<gl>
\gll ma' gis-wissugwatige-w
NEG can-cook.1-NEG
\trans I cannot cook at this time
</gl>

<gl>
\gll mu gis-wissugwatige-w
can-cook.1-NEG
\trans I am unable to cook (something is preventing me from cooking)
</gl>

Thus it is seen that ''ma' '' comes before the verb, now making the sentence grammatical.

''ma' '' always precedes the future tense AND when the ''gis'' prefix is attached to the verb conjugated in the present for example:

<gl>
\gll ma' gis-amalga-w-g
NEG can-dance-NEG-3
\trans s/he cannot dance
</gl>

There are some expressions that always take the negative form of the verb such as ''me menga'' (not yet) and ''mowen'' (nobody) that take the negative form of the verb: (examples from [http://www.mikmaqonline.org/ Mi'gmaq Online Dictionary])

<gl>
\gll me' mnaq newt ajiegw
NEG yet one time-NEG-3
\trans it is not one o’clock yet
</gl>

<gl>
\gll mu-wen mijji-gw
NEG-who eat-NEG-3
\trans no one is eating
</gl>

<gl>
\gll mu goqwei eign-u-g
no thing be-NEG-3
\trans there is nothing there
</gl>

Below is a list of common particles after which the negated form is used. This list is not complete but these are the most common forms.

{| class="wikitable"
! Particle || When used || Translation
|-
| ''mu''
| before negated present and past
| not
|-
| ''mutt''
| before negated imperative
| do not
|-
| ''lpa mu''
| before negated present and past
| not even
|-
| ''mu wen''
| before negated present, past and future
| no one/nobody
|-
| ''mu goqwei'''
| before negated present, past and future
| nothing
|-
| ''me' mnaq''
| before negated verb
| not yet
|-
| ''ma' ''
| before negated future verb and preverb ''gis'' (can)
| not
|-
|}

''moqwa' goqwei'' is also spelled ''mu goqwei'' and a variant of this is ''mu'' + negated verb + ''goqwei'' when used in object position. It is inanimate. As in the following example:

<gl>
\gll mu malqutm-u goqwei
NEG eat.1>0-NEG what
\trans I eat nothing
</gl>

== Negative Concord ==
As can be seen above, Mi'gmaq is a negative concord language. Negative concord is where "double or multiple negative[s] [do] not express an affirmative but a negative" (van der Wouden & Zwarts, 1992). This is similar to French ''Je n'ai vue personne'' 'I have seen nobody' where both the ''ne'' and ''personne'' are both negative but the resulting sentence is negative, rather than each cancelling the other out resulting in a affirmative sentence, i.e. 'I have seen someone'. Mi'gmaq has negation marked in two places with both negative particles, i.e. ''mu'' & ''ma'', and a negative conjugation of the verb, i.e. with ''-u'' or ''-w'' added. Compare examples <glr id="1"/> and <glr id="2"/>.

<gl id="1">
\gll lpa'tuj eigu-p
boy be.there.PST-SG
\trans the boy was there
</gl>

<gl id="2">
\gll lpa'tuj mu eimu-g-u-p
boy NEG be.there-PST-NEG-SG
\trans the boy was not there
</gl>

= Word Order =
The negative particle (or possibly affix) ''mu'' always appears before the verb it negates. Although words can intervene between ''mu'' and the verb it negates, ''mu'' must always precede the verb.

<gl>
\gll Mali mu amal-gag-u-p
Mali NEG dance-PAST-NEG-SG
\trans Mali did not dance
</gl>

<gl>
\gll mu Mali amal-gag-u-p
NEG Mali dance-PAST-NEG-SG
\trans Mali did not dance
</gl>

Placement of ''mu'' post-verbally results in ungrammaticality, as illustrated below.

<gl>
\gll lpa'tuj mu eimug-u-p
boy NEG be.there.PST-NEG-SG
\trans the boy was not there
</gl>

Acceptable word orders:
*mu eimugup lpa'tuj
*mu lpa'tuj eimugup

Unacceptable word orders:
* *eimugup lpa'tuj mu
* *eimugup mu lpa'tuj
* *lpa'tuj eimugup mu

Furthermore, with regards to word order, it appears that negation must come right before the constituent it negates. Here is an example sentence without negation:

<gl>
\gll ula na lpa'tuj ta'n egitgup wigatign
this DEM boy that read.PST book
\trans this is the boy that read the book
</gl>

If we want to negate the first clause, as to say "This is '''not''' the boy that read the book", negation must directly precede 'boy'.

<gl>
\gll ula na mu lpa'tuj ta'n egitgup wigatign
this DEM NEG boy that read.PST book
\trans this is not the boy that read the book
</gl>

The following word orders for negation in the first clause are impossible:
* *ula na lpa'tuj mu...
* *ula mu na lpa'tuj...
* *mu ula na lpa'tuj...

If we want to negate the second clause, as to say "This is the boy that did '''not''' read the book", the word order may be varied, as long as negation comes before the verb (as discussed previously).

== Scope of Negation ==
As stated above, ''mu'' always comes before the verb. There may be particles that intrude between ''mu'' and the negated verb, but as long as ''mu'' comes before the negated verb, the structure is grammatical. [http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED136614.pdf Micmac Grammar, 1976] Sometimes the meaning of the sentence can change depending on the position of ''mu''.

<gl>
\gll egjitm Mali mu amal-gag-u-p
possible Mali NEG dance-PST-NEG-SG
\trans it is true that Mali did not dance
</gl>

<gl>
\gll mu egjitm Mali amal-gag-u-p
NEG possible Mali dance-PST.NEG.SG
\trans it is not true that Mali danced
</gl>

We would also expect phrases with adverb-like particles translatable as "it is possible" or "it is true" or "it is obvious" would also vary regarding negation.

=Language change and negation=
Often I was not able to elicit both the dual and plural forms of a verb. There are many times when I could only elicit the dual form, or times when the dual and plural forms were the same. It has been noted by our consultants that younger speakers are not using the plural forms but are using the dual form to mean both dual and plural. This seems be a language change happening currently in the speech community where the younger generation is leading the change. As noted in the paradigm above for 'eat' in the negated present tense, both dual and plural forms are the same. Here it seems that the plural form is used for both dual and plural meanings. This would strongly suggest a change happening in the speech community.

=References=
Clark, Jeremiah S. "A Dictionary of the Micmac Language." Rand's Micmac Dictionary. Charlottetown, PEI: The Patriot Publishing Company, 1902. Print.

Delisle, Gill L., and Manny L. Metallic. Micmac Teaching Grammar. Ecowi, QC: Thunderbird Press, 1976. Print.

L'Abbe Maillard, M. Grammaire De La Langue Mikmaque. New York: Presse Cramoisy de Jean-Marie Shea, 1864. Print.

Metallic, Janine. "Mi'gmaq Elicitation Session for Field Methods of Linguistics." Ed. Class, Carol Little and LING415. Montreal, QC: n/a, 2011. Print.

Payne, Thomas Edward. Describing Morphosyntax: a Guide for Field Linguists. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge UP, 2008. Print.

Paul-Martin, Patsy. "Mi'kmaq Verb Conjugation." Ed. Orthography, Mi'kmaq Talking Posters Smith/Francis. Truto, NS: Eastern Woodland Print Communications, 2011. Print.

Proulx, Paul. "Proto-Algonquian Verb Inflection." Studies in Native American Languages 15.2 (1990): 100-45. Print.

van der Wouden, Ton, and Frans Zwarts. "Negative Concord." D. Gilbers and S. Looyenga (eds), Language and Cognition 2. Yearbook 1992 Linguistic Theory and Knowledge Representation of the University of Groningen (1992): 317-31. Print.

Negation

2014-08-07T19:09:04Z

Carol: /* When negation is used */

=Introduction=
Negation is the process of turning affirmative statements into the opposite form. For example, the negative equivalent of affirmative sentence, ''I am eating'' is ''I am not eating''. In English there are a few processes at work. ''not'' must always come with an auxiliary verb like the verb 'to have' and 'to be'. In Mi'gmaq, with its extremely detailed and expansive verb conjugations in the present, it is not surprising that the negated conjugation of verbs is just as detailed and expansive as they are in the affirmative.

To start off any commentary on negation, it seems fitting to start of with the word "no" which is ''moqwa'' in Mi'gmaq. (The opposite of this is ''e'e'' , meaning "yes".) Negation in Mi'gmaq is similar to that of Obijwe in that there is both an affix that occurs between the verb and the person marker and a word that comes before the verb denoting negation. See [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ojibwe_grammar#Verbs Verb Conjugation in Ojibwe]. The Mi'gmaq negated affix is ''w'' or ''u'' which is very closely related to the Proto-Algonquian form for negation which is is ''*-w'' ( [http://kuscholarworks.ku.edu/dspace/bitstream/1808/440/1/ling.wp.v15.n2.paper6.pdf Proulx, 1990] ). ''w'' or ''u'' are very closely related phonetically since ''w'' is the semivowel corresponding to the vowel ''u''. Bear in mind that during the elicitation sessions, sometimes it was unsure whether to use ''w'' or ''u''.

Negation in Mi'gmaq consists of adding ''mu'' or ''ma'' then the verb conjugated in the negated verb form. After ''mu'' or ''ma'' the verb must always contain a negative particle. We must think of these two things as inseparable. ''mu'' always comes before the negative conjugated verb in the present or past, and ''ma'' always comes before future or if the prefix ''gis'' ('can', 'to be able to') is attached to the verb. All other prefixes abide by the rules ''mu'' before present or past and ''ma'' before future. There are other particles that take the negated form of the verb, but it is obvious that these particles express a negated idea.

Please note as well that in some of the studies on Mi'gmaq and Algonquian languages the term 'nonaffirmative' is used to describe the negated form. For consistency in this report, I will use the term 'negated' to indicate the form of the verb which is the opposite of affirmative. 'Nonaffirmative' and 'negated' however refer to the same process of negation.

= Conjugation of the Negated Verb =
I have selected the verb ''mijji'' (to eat). Please note that some resources spell this like ''mijji'' where other spell it ''miji'' ([http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED136614.pdf Micmac Teaching Grammar, 1976]). I have selected the spelling from [http://www.mikmaqonline.org/servlet/dictionaryFrameSet.html?arg0=mijjit&method=searchFromMikmaq the Migmaq talking dictionary]. It is also important to note that the Micmac Teaching Grammar uses an orthography that is different of all other orthographies used with Mi'gmaq. I will indicate which terms they are and give the Listuguj equivalent orthographical manner of writing them.

The simplified formula for the conjugation in the negated form: the base form + ''u'' or ''w'' + person ending ([http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED136614.pdf Micmac Teaching Grammar, 1976])
The base form for intransitive verbs is always the verb in the first person singular. For example I eat is ''mijji''. Now to create the second person singular we add the ending -''n'' denoting second person singular and get the form ''mijjin''. For another type of verb (henceforth referred to as the ''a'' verbs) we take the base form ''amalga-'' and add -''n'' to get ''amalgan'' (you dance) and to get the first person singular we add -''i''. Please note that it has been hypothesized that there are at least eleven different conjugations. We will only be dealing with a couple here. Because of reasons of time limitation, I was not able to elicit all eleven types but when there is a difference in conjugation, that will be noted. Note that in the plural the ''u'' or ''w'' comes after ''-ulti-''. This could be due the the fact that ''-ulti-'' is the plural affix that attaches to the base form of the verb and does not convey anything about the tense of the verb, rather it is used to denote that the verb is plural. Thus the ''u'' or ''w'' comes right before the tense marker which is always at the end of the verb. For the first person singular in present there is a null tense marker at the end of some verbs (for example the ''-i'' verbs) thus the negative marker is at the end.

== Present Tense ==
First is a comparison of the affirmative and negated paradigms of the verb ''mijji'' ('eat').

{| class="wikitable"
|+ mijji- 'eat'
|-
! scope="col" colspan="2"| ↓person / number→
! scope="col" | SG
! scope="col" | DU
! scope="col" | PL
|-
! scope="row" rowspan="2"| 1
! scope="row"| 13
| rowspan="2" | mijji
|mijjieg
|mijjultieg
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| mijji'gw
| mijjulti'gw
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2" | 2
| mijjin
| mijjioq
| mijjultioq
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2"| 3
| mijjit
| mijjijig
| mijjultijig
|-
|}

{| class="wikitable"
|+ mu mijji- 'not eat'
|-
! scope="col" colspan="2"| ↓person / number→
! scope="col" | SG
! scope="col" | DU
! scope="col" | PL
|-
! scope="row" rowspan="2"| 1
! scope="row"| 13
| rowspan="2" | mu mijjiw
| mu mijjiweg
| mu mijjultiweg
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| mu mijjigw
| mu mijjultigw
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2" | 2
| mu mijjiun
| mu mijjiwoq
| mu mijjultiwoq
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2"| 3
| mu mijjigw
| mu mijji'gw
| mu mijjulti'gw
|-
|}

The word ''mu'' signifies negation. When ''mu'' is in front of the verb, the verb must also be conjugated in the negative form. In the above table we see the intrusion of the sound ''u'', ''ew'' or ''w''. The following table illustrates the endings for the present negative tense, keeping in mind ''mu'' must ALWAYS come right before the negated verb. When ''mu'' precedes a verb it must ALWAYS be in the negated form.

Below is a table that summarizes the VAI -i stem negative person endings in present conjugation. Inanimate [IN] conjugation was taken from the Micmac Grammar (1976, pg 155).

{| class="wikitable"
|+ VAI -i stem negative present person endings
|-
! scope="col" colspan="2"| ↓person / number→
! scope="col" | SG
! scope="col" | DU
! scope="col" | PL
|-
! scope="row" rowspan="2"| 1
! scope="row"| 13
| rowspan="2" |-u
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2" | 2
| -
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2"| 3.AN
| -
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2"| 3.IN
| -
| -
| -
|-
|}

The forms for the first person dual and plural in the exclusive and inclusive forms are the same. As shown by other data, the dual form seems to be in the process of disappearing. This is one such example where the dual form does not exist for the plural first person. Some younger speakers do not use the dual form at all so it is not surprising that we find a gap in the dual form here. All this is according to the speaker but if we followed the pattern of the previous forms we would expect the dual form for the inclusive and exclusive first person to be ''-ieweg''. "When the verb is negated, then the -g third person is ALWAYS found" (Micmac Grammar, 1976 pg 93).

Below is a comparison of different verbs to give an idea of how to conjugate different types of verbs in the negated form. All forms are conjugated in the present singular third person animate. The form of -''elie-'' was taken from Micmac Grammar (pg 155). For more detail about these forms see [[VAI]].

{| class="wikitable"
! VAI stem || Base Form || Gloss || Affirmative || Gloss || Negated || Gloss
|-
| -i
| mijji-
| eat
| mijjit
| s/he eats
| mu mijjigw
| s/he does not eat
|-
| -a
| amalga-
| dance
| amalgat
| s/he dances
| mu amalgagw
| s/he does not dance
|-
| -a'si
| ala'si-
| go around
| ala'sit
| s/he goes around
| mu ala'sigw
| s/he does not go around
|-
| -e
| elie-
| go
| eliet
| s/he goes
| mu eliegw
| s/he does not go
|-
|}

For verb conjugations in the affirmative please see [http://firstnationhelp.com/ali/posters/pdf/verb_conjugation.pdf Mi'kmaq Verb Conjugation]. As you can see, this site uses the verb ''mijisi'' meaning 'to eat'. In Listuguj this is not used as the word for to eat because it sounds too close for the verb ''mejisi'' 'to excrete'.

=== Transitive ===
Below is the conjugation in present of a transitive verb that takes an inanimate object.

{| class="wikitable" style="text-align:center"
|+ VTI Conjugation Class 1: -m class
|-
! scope="col" | ↓subject / object→
! scope="col" | 0SG
! scope="col" | 0PL
|-
! scope="row" | 1
| malqutm
| malqutmann
|-
! scope="row" | 13
| malqutmeg
| malqutmegl
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| malqutmu'g
| malqutmu'gul
|-
! scope="row" | 2
| malqutmn
| malqutmnn
|-
! scope="row" | 2PL
| malqutmoq
| malqutmoqol
|-
! scope="row" | 3
| malqutmeg
| malqutmegl
|-
! scope="row" | 3PL
| malqutmi'tij
| malqutmi'titl
|}

{| class="wikitable" style="text-align:center"
|+ VTI Negative Conjugation Class 1: -m class
|-
! scope="col" | ↓subject / object→
! scope="col" | 0SG
! scope="col" | 0PL
|-
! scope="row" | 1
| mu malqutmu
| mu malqutmuann
|-
! scope="row" | 13
| mu malqutmueg
| mu malqutmuegl
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| mu malqutmugg
| mu malqutmuggul
|-
! scope="row" | 2
| mu malqutmu'n
| mu malqutmu'nn
|-
! scope="row" | 2PL
| mu malqutmuoq
| mu malqutmuoqol
|-
! scope="row" | 3
| mu malqutmug
| mu malqutmugul
|-
! scope="row" | 3PL
| mu malqutmi'tigw
| mu malqutmi'tigul
|-
|}

{| class="wikitable" style="text-align:center"
|+ VTI Negative Conjugation Class 1: -m class
|-
! scope="col" | ↓subject / object→
! scope="col" | 0SG
! scope="col" | 0PL
|-
! scope="row" | 1
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 13
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 12
|
|
|-
! scope="row" | 2
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 2PL
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 3
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 3PL
| -
| -
|-
|}

== Imperative ==
Here is the formation of the affirmative imperative:
{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijji-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 2 Second person
| mijji
| mijjigw
| mijjultigw
|-
|}

Now we compare it to the negated:
{| class="wikitable"
! ''mutt mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 2 Second person
| mutt mijjiw
| mutt mijjinew
| mutt mijjultinew
|-
|}

== Past Tense ==
Again for the past we compare the past and the negated past.

{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| mijjiap
| mijjieg'p
| mijjultieg'p
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| mijji'gup
| mijjulti'gup
|-
| 2 Second person
| mijjit'p
| mijjioqop
| mijjultioqop
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| mijjip
| mijjipni'g
| mijjultipni'g
|}

Now let us look at the negated forms.

{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| mu mijjiwap
| mu mijjiweg'p
| mu mijjultiweg'p
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| mu mijjiwgup
| mu mijjultiwgup/mijjultiggup
|-
| 2 Second person
| mu mijjiwt'p
| mu mijjiwoqop
| mu mijjultiwoqop
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| mu mijjigup
| mu mijjigupnig
| mu mijjultigupnig
|}

Thus this would be the conjugation of the negated form:

{| class="wikitable"
! Negated Past||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| -
| -
| -
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| -
| -
|-
| 2 Second person
| -
| -
| -
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| -
|
|
|}

For the third person the -''ug'p'' can change to -''weg'p'' for example:

<gl>
\gll Mu ala'ti-we-g'p
not go-NEG-SG.PAST
\trans She didn't go
</gl>

== Future Tense ==
First let us compare the affirmative tense for eat:

{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| mijjit's/mijjia's(List)
| mijjitesnen
| mijjultitesnen
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| mijjitesnu
| mijjultitesnu
|-
| 2 Second person
| mijjit'sg
| mijjitoqs'p
| mijjultitoqs'p
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| mijjitew
| mijjitaq
| mijjultitaq
|}
I was not able to elicit dual forms.

We compare the future affirmative with the negated below:

{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| ma' mijjiw
| ma' mijjiweg
| ma' mijjultiweg
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| ma' mijjigw
| ma' mijjultigw
|-
| 2 Second person
| ma' mijjiun
| ma' mijjiwoq
| ma' mijjultiwoq
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| ma' mijjigw
| ma' mijji'gw
| ma' mijjulti'gw
|}
NOTE: In the future the ''mu'' changes to ''ma' '' !! Like ''mu'', ''ma'' must always come before the verb conjugated in the negative future.
The correspondent was not able to produce a dual form in the future.

Now here is a paradigm of the negated endings in the future.

{| class="wikitable"
! Negated Future||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| -
| -
| -
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
|
| -
| -
|-
| 2 Second person
| -
|
|
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
|
|
|
|}

As you may have noticed the future tense is easy! The verbs take the same endings as the negated present tense but the ''mu'' is replaced with ''ma'' thus indicating future.

== When negation is used ==

When the verb is negated there must always find a negative particle (like ''mu'' or ''ma''). If not the sentence is ungrammatical as shown below:

<gl>
\gll *gis-wissugwatige-w
can-cook.1-NEG
\trans I cannot cook (intended meaning)
</gl>

The only form of the above sentence must be:

<gl>
\gll ma' gis-wissugwatige-w
NEG can-cook.1-NEG
\trans I cannot cook at this time
</gl>

<gl>
\gll mu gis-wissugwatige-w
can-cook.1-NEG
\trans I am unable to cook (something is preventing me from cooking)
</gl>

Thus it is seen that ''ma' '' comes before the verb, now making the sentence grammatical.

''ma' '' always precedes the future tense AND when the ''gis'' prefix is attached to the verb conjugated in the present for example:

<gl>
\gll ma' gis-amalga-w-g
NEG can-dance-NEG-3
\trans s/he cannot dance
</gl>

There are some expressions that always take the negative form of the verb such as ''me menga'' (not yet) and ''mowen'' (nobody) that take the negative form of the verb: (examples from [http://www.mikmaqonline.org/ Mi'gmaq Online Dictionary])

<gl>
\gll me' mnaq newt ajiegw
NEG yet one time-NEG-3
\trans it is not one o’clock yet
</gl>

<gl>
\gll mo-wen mijji-gw
NEG-who eat-NEG-3
\trans no one is eating
</gl>

<gl>
\gll mu goqwei eign-u-g
no thing be-NEG-3
\trans there is nothing there
</gl>

Below is a list of common particles after which the negated form is used. This list is not complete but these are the most common forms.

{| class="wikitable"
! Particle || When used || Translation
|-
| ''mu''
| before negated present and past
| not
|-
| ''mutt''
| before negated imperative
| do not
|-
| ''lpa mu''
| before negated present and past
| not even
|-
| ''mowen''
| before negated present, past and future
| no one/nobody
|-
| ''mu goqwei'''
| before negated present, past and future
| nothing
|-
| ''me menag''
| before negated verb
| not yet
|-
| ''ma''
| before negated future verb and preverb ''gis'' (can)
| not
|-
|}

''moqwa' goqwei'' is also spelled ''mu goqwei'' and a variant of this is ''mu'' + negated verb + ''goqwei'' when used in object position. It is inanimate. As in the following example:

<gl>
\gll mu malqutm-u goqwei
NEG eat.1>0-NEG what
\trans I eat nothing
</gl>

== Negative Concord ==
As can be seen above, Mi'gmaq is a negative concord language. Negative concord is where "double or multiple negative[s] [do] not express an affirmative but a negative" (van der Wouden & Zwarts, 1992). This is similar to French ''Je n'ai vue personne'' 'I have seen nobody' where both the ''ne'' and ''personne'' are both negative but the resulting sentence is negative, rather than each cancelling the other out resulting in a affirmative sentence, i.e. 'I have seen someone'. Mi'gmaq has negation marked in two places with both negative particles, i.e. ''mu'' & ''ma'', and a negative conjugation of the verb, i.e. with ''-u'' or ''-w'' added. Compare examples <glr id="1"/> and <glr id="2"/>.

<gl id="1">
\gll lpa'tuj eigu-p
boy be.there.PST-SG
\trans the boy was there
</gl>

<gl id="2">
\gll lpa'tuj mu eimu-g-u-p
boy NEG be.there-PST-NEG-SG
\trans the boy was not there
</gl>

= Word Order =
The negative particle (or possibly affix) ''mu'' always appears before the verb it negates. Although words can intervene between ''mu'' and the verb it negates, ''mu'' must always precede the verb.

<gl>
\gll Mali mu amal-gag-u-p
Mali NEG dance-PAST-NEG-SG
\trans Mali did not dance
</gl>

<gl>
\gll mu Mali amal-gag-u-p
NEG Mali dance-PAST-NEG-SG
\trans Mali did not dance
</gl>

Placement of ''mu'' post-verbally results in ungrammaticality, as illustrated below.

<gl>
\gll lpa'tuj mu eimug-u-p
boy NEG be.there.PST-NEG-SG
\trans the boy was not there
</gl>

Acceptable word orders:
*mu eimugup lpa'tuj
*mu lpa'tuj eimugup

Unacceptable word orders:
* *eimugup lpa'tuj mu
* *eimugup mu lpa'tuj
* *lpa'tuj eimugup mu

Furthermore, with regards to word order, it appears that negation must come right before the constituent it negates. Here is an example sentence without negation:

<gl>
\gll ula na lpa'tuj ta'n egitgup wigatign
this DEM boy that read.PST book
\trans this is the boy that read the book
</gl>

If we want to negate the first clause, as to say "This is '''not''' the boy that read the book", negation must directly precede 'boy'.

<gl>
\gll ula na mu lpa'tuj ta'n egitgup wigatign
this DEM NEG boy that read.PST book
\trans this is not the boy that read the book
</gl>

The following word orders for negation in the first clause are impossible:
* *ula na lpa'tuj mu...
* *ula mu na lpa'tuj...
* *mu ula na lpa'tuj...

If we want to negate the second clause, as to say "This is the boy that did '''not''' read the book", the word order may be varied, as long as negation comes before the verb (as discussed previously).

== Scope of Negation ==
As stated above, ''mu'' always comes before the verb. There may be particles that intrude between ''mu'' and the negated verb, but as long as ''mu'' comes before the negated verb, the structure is grammatical. [http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED136614.pdf Micmac Grammar, 1976] Sometimes the meaning of the sentence can change depending on the position of ''mu''.

<gl>
\gll egjitm Mali mu amal-gag-u-p
possible Mali NEG dance-PST-NEG-SG
\trans it is true that Mali did not dance
</gl>

<gl>
\gll mu egjitm Mali amal-gag-u-p
NEG possible Mali dance-PST.NEG.SG
\trans it is not true that Mali danced
</gl>

We would also expect phrases with adverb-like particles translatable as "it is possible" or "it is true" or "it is obvious" would also vary regarding negation.

=Language change and negation=
Often I was not able to elicit both the dual and plural forms of a verb. There are many times when I could only elicit the dual form, or times when the dual and plural forms were the same. It has been noted by our consultants that younger speakers are not using the plural forms but are using the dual form to mean both dual and plural. This seems be a language change happening currently in the speech community where the younger generation is leading the change. As noted in the paradigm above for 'eat' in the negated present tense, both dual and plural forms are the same. Here it seems that the plural form is used for both dual and plural meanings. This would strongly suggest a change happening in the speech community.

=References=
Clark, Jeremiah S. "A Dictionary of the Micmac Language." Rand's Micmac Dictionary. Charlottetown, PEI: The Patriot Publishing Company, 1902. Print.

Delisle, Gill L., and Manny L. Metallic. Micmac Teaching Grammar. Ecowi, QC: Thunderbird Press, 1976. Print.

L'Abbe Maillard, M. Grammaire De La Langue Mikmaque. New York: Presse Cramoisy de Jean-Marie Shea, 1864. Print.

Metallic, Janine. "Mi'gmaq Elicitation Session for Field Methods of Linguistics." Ed. Class, Carol Little and LING415. Montreal, QC: n/a, 2011. Print.

Payne, Thomas Edward. Describing Morphosyntax: a Guide for Field Linguists. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge UP, 2008. Print.

Paul-Martin, Patsy. "Mi'kmaq Verb Conjugation." Ed. Orthography, Mi'kmaq Talking Posters Smith/Francis. Truto, NS: Eastern Woodland Print Communications, 2011. Print.

Proulx, Paul. "Proto-Algonquian Verb Inflection." Studies in Native American Languages 15.2 (1990): 100-45. Print.

van der Wouden, Ton, and Frans Zwarts. "Negative Concord." D. Gilbers and S. Looyenga (eds), Language and Cognition 2. Yearbook 1992 Linguistic Theory and Knowledge Representation of the University of Groningen (1992): 317-31. Print.

Negation

2014-08-07T19:04:49Z

Carol: /* When negation is used */

=Introduction=
Negation is the process of turning affirmative statements into the opposite form. For example, the negative equivalent of affirmative sentence, ''I am eating'' is ''I am not eating''. In English there are a few processes at work. ''not'' must always come with an auxiliary verb like the verb 'to have' and 'to be'. In Mi'gmaq, with its extremely detailed and expansive verb conjugations in the present, it is not surprising that the negated conjugation of verbs is just as detailed and expansive as they are in the affirmative.

To start off any commentary on negation, it seems fitting to start of with the word "no" which is ''moqwa'' in Mi'gmaq. (The opposite of this is ''e'e'' , meaning "yes".) Negation in Mi'gmaq is similar to that of Obijwe in that there is both an affix that occurs between the verb and the person marker and a word that comes before the verb denoting negation. See [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ojibwe_grammar#Verbs Verb Conjugation in Ojibwe]. The Mi'gmaq negated affix is ''w'' or ''u'' which is very closely related to the Proto-Algonquian form for negation which is is ''*-w'' ( [http://kuscholarworks.ku.edu/dspace/bitstream/1808/440/1/ling.wp.v15.n2.paper6.pdf Proulx, 1990] ). ''w'' or ''u'' are very closely related phonetically since ''w'' is the semivowel corresponding to the vowel ''u''. Bear in mind that during the elicitation sessions, sometimes it was unsure whether to use ''w'' or ''u''.

Negation in Mi'gmaq consists of adding ''mu'' or ''ma'' then the verb conjugated in the negated verb form. After ''mu'' or ''ma'' the verb must always contain a negative particle. We must think of these two things as inseparable. ''mu'' always comes before the negative conjugated verb in the present or past, and ''ma'' always comes before future or if the prefix ''gis'' ('can', 'to be able to') is attached to the verb. All other prefixes abide by the rules ''mu'' before present or past and ''ma'' before future. There are other particles that take the negated form of the verb, but it is obvious that these particles express a negated idea.

Please note as well that in some of the studies on Mi'gmaq and Algonquian languages the term 'nonaffirmative' is used to describe the negated form. For consistency in this report, I will use the term 'negated' to indicate the form of the verb which is the opposite of affirmative. 'Nonaffirmative' and 'negated' however refer to the same process of negation.

= Conjugation of the Negated Verb =
I have selected the verb ''mijji'' (to eat). Please note that some resources spell this like ''mijji'' where other spell it ''miji'' ([http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED136614.pdf Micmac Teaching Grammar, 1976]). I have selected the spelling from [http://www.mikmaqonline.org/servlet/dictionaryFrameSet.html?arg0=mijjit&method=searchFromMikmaq the Migmaq talking dictionary]. It is also important to note that the Micmac Teaching Grammar uses an orthography that is different of all other orthographies used with Mi'gmaq. I will indicate which terms they are and give the Listuguj equivalent orthographical manner of writing them.

The simplified formula for the conjugation in the negated form: the base form + ''u'' or ''w'' + person ending ([http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED136614.pdf Micmac Teaching Grammar, 1976])
The base form for intransitive verbs is always the verb in the first person singular. For example I eat is ''mijji''. Now to create the second person singular we add the ending -''n'' denoting second person singular and get the form ''mijjin''. For another type of verb (henceforth referred to as the ''a'' verbs) we take the base form ''amalga-'' and add -''n'' to get ''amalgan'' (you dance) and to get the first person singular we add -''i''. Please note that it has been hypothesized that there are at least eleven different conjugations. We will only be dealing with a couple here. Because of reasons of time limitation, I was not able to elicit all eleven types but when there is a difference in conjugation, that will be noted. Note that in the plural the ''u'' or ''w'' comes after ''-ulti-''. This could be due the the fact that ''-ulti-'' is the plural affix that attaches to the base form of the verb and does not convey anything about the tense of the verb, rather it is used to denote that the verb is plural. Thus the ''u'' or ''w'' comes right before the tense marker which is always at the end of the verb. For the first person singular in present there is a null tense marker at the end of some verbs (for example the ''-i'' verbs) thus the negative marker is at the end.

== Present Tense ==
First is a comparison of the affirmative and negated paradigms of the verb ''mijji'' ('eat').

{| class="wikitable"
|+ mijji- 'eat'
|-
! scope="col" colspan="2"| ↓person / number→
! scope="col" | SG
! scope="col" | DU
! scope="col" | PL
|-
! scope="row" rowspan="2"| 1
! scope="row"| 13
| rowspan="2" | mijji
|mijjieg
|mijjultieg
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| mijji'gw
| mijjulti'gw
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2" | 2
| mijjin
| mijjioq
| mijjultioq
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2"| 3
| mijjit
| mijjijig
| mijjultijig
|-
|}

{| class="wikitable"
|+ mu mijji- 'not eat'
|-
! scope="col" colspan="2"| ↓person / number→
! scope="col" | SG
! scope="col" | DU
! scope="col" | PL
|-
! scope="row" rowspan="2"| 1
! scope="row"| 13
| rowspan="2" | mu mijjiw
| mu mijjiweg
| mu mijjultiweg
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| mu mijjigw
| mu mijjultigw
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2" | 2
| mu mijjiun
| mu mijjiwoq
| mu mijjultiwoq
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2"| 3
| mu mijjigw
| mu mijji'gw
| mu mijjulti'gw
|-
|}

The word ''mu'' signifies negation. When ''mu'' is in front of the verb, the verb must also be conjugated in the negative form. In the above table we see the intrusion of the sound ''u'', ''ew'' or ''w''. The following table illustrates the endings for the present negative tense, keeping in mind ''mu'' must ALWAYS come right before the negated verb. When ''mu'' precedes a verb it must ALWAYS be in the negated form.

Below is a table that summarizes the VAI -i stem negative person endings in present conjugation. Inanimate [IN] conjugation was taken from the Micmac Grammar (1976, pg 155).

{| class="wikitable"
|+ VAI -i stem negative present person endings
|-
! scope="col" colspan="2"| ↓person / number→
! scope="col" | SG
! scope="col" | DU
! scope="col" | PL
|-
! scope="row" rowspan="2"| 1
! scope="row"| 13
| rowspan="2" |-u
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2" | 2
| -
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2"| 3.AN
| -
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2"| 3.IN
| -
| -
| -
|-
|}

The forms for the first person dual and plural in the exclusive and inclusive forms are the same. As shown by other data, the dual form seems to be in the process of disappearing. This is one such example where the dual form does not exist for the plural first person. Some younger speakers do not use the dual form at all so it is not surprising that we find a gap in the dual form here. All this is according to the speaker but if we followed the pattern of the previous forms we would expect the dual form for the inclusive and exclusive first person to be ''-ieweg''. "When the verb is negated, then the -g third person is ALWAYS found" (Micmac Grammar, 1976 pg 93).

Below is a comparison of different verbs to give an idea of how to conjugate different types of verbs in the negated form. All forms are conjugated in the present singular third person animate. The form of -''elie-'' was taken from Micmac Grammar (pg 155). For more detail about these forms see [[VAI]].

{| class="wikitable"
! VAI stem || Base Form || Gloss || Affirmative || Gloss || Negated || Gloss
|-
| -i
| mijji-
| eat
| mijjit
| s/he eats
| mu mijjigw
| s/he does not eat
|-
| -a
| amalga-
| dance
| amalgat
| s/he dances
| mu amalgagw
| s/he does not dance
|-
| -a'si
| ala'si-
| go around
| ala'sit
| s/he goes around
| mu ala'sigw
| s/he does not go around
|-
| -e
| elie-
| go
| eliet
| s/he goes
| mu eliegw
| s/he does not go
|-
|}

For verb conjugations in the affirmative please see [http://firstnationhelp.com/ali/posters/pdf/verb_conjugation.pdf Mi'kmaq Verb Conjugation]. As you can see, this site uses the verb ''mijisi'' meaning 'to eat'. In Listuguj this is not used as the word for to eat because it sounds too close for the verb ''mejisi'' 'to excrete'.

=== Transitive ===
Below is the conjugation in present of a transitive verb that takes an inanimate object.

{| class="wikitable" style="text-align:center"
|+ VTI Conjugation Class 1: -m class
|-
! scope="col" | ↓subject / object→
! scope="col" | 0SG
! scope="col" | 0PL
|-
! scope="row" | 1
| malqutm
| malqutmann
|-
! scope="row" | 13
| malqutmeg
| malqutmegl
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| malqutmu'g
| malqutmu'gul
|-
! scope="row" | 2
| malqutmn
| malqutmnn
|-
! scope="row" | 2PL
| malqutmoq
| malqutmoqol
|-
! scope="row" | 3
| malqutmeg
| malqutmegl
|-
! scope="row" | 3PL
| malqutmi'tij
| malqutmi'titl
|}

{| class="wikitable" style="text-align:center"
|+ VTI Negative Conjugation Class 1: -m class
|-
! scope="col" | ↓subject / object→
! scope="col" | 0SG
! scope="col" | 0PL
|-
! scope="row" | 1
| mu malqutmu
| mu malqutmuann
|-
! scope="row" | 13
| mu malqutmueg
| mu malqutmuegl
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| mu malqutmugg
| mu malqutmuggul
|-
! scope="row" | 2
| mu malqutmu'n
| mu malqutmu'nn
|-
! scope="row" | 2PL
| mu malqutmuoq
| mu malqutmuoqol
|-
! scope="row" | 3
| mu malqutmug
| mu malqutmugul
|-
! scope="row" | 3PL
| mu malqutmi'tigw
| mu malqutmi'tigul
|-
|}

{| class="wikitable" style="text-align:center"
|+ VTI Negative Conjugation Class 1: -m class
|-
! scope="col" | ↓subject / object→
! scope="col" | 0SG
! scope="col" | 0PL
|-
! scope="row" | 1
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 13
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 12
|
|
|-
! scope="row" | 2
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 2PL
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 3
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 3PL
| -
| -
|-
|}

== Imperative ==
Here is the formation of the affirmative imperative:
{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijji-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 2 Second person
| mijji
| mijjigw
| mijjultigw
|-
|}

Now we compare it to the negated:
{| class="wikitable"
! ''mutt mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 2 Second person
| mutt mijjiw
| mutt mijjinew
| mutt mijjultinew
|-
|}

== Past Tense ==
Again for the past we compare the past and the negated past.

{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| mijjiap
| mijjieg'p
| mijjultieg'p
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| mijji'gup
| mijjulti'gup
|-
| 2 Second person
| mijjit'p
| mijjioqop
| mijjultioqop
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| mijjip
| mijjipni'g
| mijjultipni'g
|}

Now let us look at the negated forms.

{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| mu mijjiwap
| mu mijjiweg'p
| mu mijjultiweg'p
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| mu mijjiwgup
| mu mijjultiwgup/mijjultiggup
|-
| 2 Second person
| mu mijjiwt'p
| mu mijjiwoqop
| mu mijjultiwoqop
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| mu mijjigup
| mu mijjigupnig
| mu mijjultigupnig
|}

Thus this would be the conjugation of the negated form:

{| class="wikitable"
! Negated Past||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| -
| -
| -
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| -
| -
|-
| 2 Second person
| -
| -
| -
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| -
|
|
|}

For the third person the -''ug'p'' can change to -''weg'p'' for example:

<gl>
\gll Mu ala'ti-we-g'p
not go-NEG-SG.PAST
\trans She didn't go
</gl>

== Future Tense ==
First let us compare the affirmative tense for eat:

{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| mijjit's/mijjia's(List)
| mijjitesnen
| mijjultitesnen
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| mijjitesnu
| mijjultitesnu
|-
| 2 Second person
| mijjit'sg
| mijjitoqs'p
| mijjultitoqs'p
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| mijjitew
| mijjitaq
| mijjultitaq
|}
I was not able to elicit dual forms.

We compare the future affirmative with the negated below:

{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| ma' mijjiw
| ma' mijjiweg
| ma' mijjultiweg
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| ma' mijjigw
| ma' mijjultigw
|-
| 2 Second person
| ma' mijjiun
| ma' mijjiwoq
| ma' mijjultiwoq
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| ma' mijjigw
| ma' mijji'gw
| ma' mijjulti'gw
|}
NOTE: In the future the ''mu'' changes to ''ma' '' !! Like ''mu'', ''ma'' must always come before the verb conjugated in the negative future.
The correspondent was not able to produce a dual form in the future.

Now here is a paradigm of the negated endings in the future.

{| class="wikitable"
! Negated Future||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| -
| -
| -
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
|
| -
| -
|-
| 2 Second person
| -
|
|
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
|
|
|
|}

As you may have noticed the future tense is easy! The verbs take the same endings as the negated present tense but the ''mu'' is replaced with ''ma'' thus indicating future.

== When negation is used ==

When the verb is negated there must always find a negative particle (like ''mu'' or ''ma''). If not the sentence is ungrammatical as shown below:

<gl>
\gll *gis-wissugwatige-w
can-cook.1-NEG
\trans I cannot cook (intended meaning)
</gl>

The only form of the above sentence must be:

<gl>
\gll ma' gis-wissugwatige-w
NEG can-cook.1-NEG
\trans I cannot cook at this time
</gl>

<gl>
\gll mu gis-wissugwatige-w
can-cook.1-NEG
\trans I am unable to cook (something is preventing me from cooking)
</gl>

Thus it is seen that ''ma'' comes before the verb, now making the sentence grammatical.

''ma'' always precedes the future tense AND when the ''gis'' prefix is attached to the verb conjugated in the present for example:

<gl>
\gll ma gis-amalga-w-g
NEG can-dance-NEG-3
\trans s/he cannot dance
</gl>

There are some expressions that always take the negative form of the verb such as ''me menga'' (not yet) and ''mowen'' (nobody) that take the negative form of the verb: (examples from [http://www.mikmaqonline.org/ Mi'gmaq Online Dictionary])

<gl>
\gll me menag newt ajetten-u-g
NEG yet one time-NEG-3
\trans it is not one o’clock yet
</gl>

<gl>
\gll mo-wen mijie-w-g
NEG-who eat-NEG-3
\trans no one is eating
</gl>

<gl>
\gll moqwa' goqwei eign-u-g
no thing be-NEG-3
\trans there is nothing there
</gl>

Below is a list of common particles after which the negated form is used. This list is not complete but these are the most common forms.

{| class="wikitable"
! Particle || When used || Translation
|-
| ''mu''
| before negated present and past
| not
|-
| ''mutt''
| before negated imperative
| do not
|-
| ''lpa mu''
| before negated present and past
| not even
|-
| ''mowen''
| before negated present, past and future
| no one/nobody
|-
| ''moqwa' goqwei'''
| before negated present, past and future
| nothing
|-
| ''me menag''
| before negated verb
| not yet
|-
| ''ma''
| before negated future verb and preverb ''gis'' (can)
| not
|-
|}

''moqwa' goqwei'' is also spelled ''mu goqwei'' and a variant of this is ''mu'' + negated verb + ''goqwei'' when used in object position. It is inanimate. As in the following example:

<gl>
\gll mu malqutem-u goqwei
NEG eat.1>0-NEG what
\trans I eat nothing
</gl>

== Negative Concord ==
As can be seen above, Mi'gmaq is a negative concord language. Negative concord is where "double or multiple negative[s] [do] not express an affirmative but a negative" (van der Wouden & Zwarts, 1992). This is similar to French ''Je n'ai vue personne'' 'I have seen nobody' where both the ''ne'' and ''personne'' are both negative but the resulting sentence is negative, rather than each cancelling the other out resulting in a affirmative sentence, i.e. 'I have seen someone'. Mi'gmaq has negation marked in two places with both negative particles, i.e. ''mu'' & ''ma'', and a negative conjugation of the verb, i.e. with ''-u'' or ''-w'' added. Compare examples <glr id="1"/> and <glr id="2"/>.

<gl id="1">
\gll lpa'tuj eigu-p
boy be.there.PST-SG
\trans the boy was there
</gl>

<gl id="2">
\gll lpa'tuj mu eimu-g-u-p
boy NEG be.there-PST-NEG-SG
\trans the boy was not there
</gl>

= Word Order =
The negative particle (or possibly affix) ''mu'' always appears before the verb it negates. Although words can intervene between ''mu'' and the verb it negates, ''mu'' must always precede the verb.

<gl>
\gll Mali mu amal-gag-u-p
Mali NEG dance-PAST-NEG-SG
\trans Mali did not dance
</gl>

<gl>
\gll mu Mali amal-gag-u-p
NEG Mali dance-PAST-NEG-SG
\trans Mali did not dance
</gl>

Placement of ''mu'' post-verbally results in ungrammaticality, as illustrated below.

<gl>
\gll lpa'tuj mu eimug-u-p
boy NEG be.there.PST-NEG-SG
\trans the boy was not there
</gl>

Acceptable word orders:
*mu eimugup lpa'tuj
*mu lpa'tuj eimugup

Unacceptable word orders:
* *eimugup lpa'tuj mu
* *eimugup mu lpa'tuj
* *lpa'tuj eimugup mu

Furthermore, with regards to word order, it appears that negation must come right before the constituent it negates. Here is an example sentence without negation:

<gl>
\gll ula na lpa'tuj ta'n egitgup wigatign
this DEM boy that read.PST book
\trans this is the boy that read the book
</gl>

If we want to negate the first clause, as to say "This is '''not''' the boy that read the book", negation must directly precede 'boy'.

<gl>
\gll ula na mu lpa'tuj ta'n egitgup wigatign
this DEM NEG boy that read.PST book
\trans this is not the boy that read the book
</gl>

The following word orders for negation in the first clause are impossible:
* *ula na lpa'tuj mu...
* *ula mu na lpa'tuj...
* *mu ula na lpa'tuj...

If we want to negate the second clause, as to say "This is the boy that did '''not''' read the book", the word order may be varied, as long as negation comes before the verb (as discussed previously).

== Scope of Negation ==
As stated above, ''mu'' always comes before the verb. There may be particles that intrude between ''mu'' and the negated verb, but as long as ''mu'' comes before the negated verb, the structure is grammatical. [http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED136614.pdf Micmac Grammar, 1976] Sometimes the meaning of the sentence can change depending on the position of ''mu''.

<gl>
\gll egjitm Mali mu amal-gag-u-p
possible Mali NEG dance-PST-NEG-SG
\trans it is true that Mali did not dance
</gl>

<gl>
\gll mu egjitm Mali amal-gag-u-p
NEG possible Mali dance-PST.NEG.SG
\trans it is not true that Mali danced
</gl>

We would also expect phrases with adverb-like particles translatable as "it is possible" or "it is true" or "it is obvious" would also vary regarding negation.

=Language change and negation=
Often I was not able to elicit both the dual and plural forms of a verb. There are many times when I could only elicit the dual form, or times when the dual and plural forms were the same. It has been noted by our consultants that younger speakers are not using the plural forms but are using the dual form to mean both dual and plural. This seems be a language change happening currently in the speech community where the younger generation is leading the change. As noted in the paradigm above for 'eat' in the negated present tense, both dual and plural forms are the same. Here it seems that the plural form is used for both dual and plural meanings. This would strongly suggest a change happening in the speech community.

=References=
Clark, Jeremiah S. "A Dictionary of the Micmac Language." Rand's Micmac Dictionary. Charlottetown, PEI: The Patriot Publishing Company, 1902. Print.

Delisle, Gill L., and Manny L. Metallic. Micmac Teaching Grammar. Ecowi, QC: Thunderbird Press, 1976. Print.

L'Abbe Maillard, M. Grammaire De La Langue Mikmaque. New York: Presse Cramoisy de Jean-Marie Shea, 1864. Print.

Metallic, Janine. "Mi'gmaq Elicitation Session for Field Methods of Linguistics." Ed. Class, Carol Little and LING415. Montreal, QC: n/a, 2011. Print.

Payne, Thomas Edward. Describing Morphosyntax: a Guide for Field Linguists. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge UP, 2008. Print.

Paul-Martin, Patsy. "Mi'kmaq Verb Conjugation." Ed. Orthography, Mi'kmaq Talking Posters Smith/Francis. Truto, NS: Eastern Woodland Print Communications, 2011. Print.

Proulx, Paul. "Proto-Algonquian Verb Inflection." Studies in Native American Languages 15.2 (1990): 100-45. Print.

van der Wouden, Ton, and Frans Zwarts. "Negative Concord." D. Gilbers and S. Looyenga (eds), Language and Cognition 2. Yearbook 1992 Linguistic Theory and Knowledge Representation of the University of Groningen (1992): 317-31. Print.

Negation

2014-08-07T19:02:21Z

Carol: /* Future Tense */

=Introduction=
Negation is the process of turning affirmative statements into the opposite form. For example, the negative equivalent of affirmative sentence, ''I am eating'' is ''I am not eating''. In English there are a few processes at work. ''not'' must always come with an auxiliary verb like the verb 'to have' and 'to be'. In Mi'gmaq, with its extremely detailed and expansive verb conjugations in the present, it is not surprising that the negated conjugation of verbs is just as detailed and expansive as they are in the affirmative.

To start off any commentary on negation, it seems fitting to start of with the word "no" which is ''moqwa'' in Mi'gmaq. (The opposite of this is ''e'e'' , meaning "yes".) Negation in Mi'gmaq is similar to that of Obijwe in that there is both an affix that occurs between the verb and the person marker and a word that comes before the verb denoting negation. See [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ojibwe_grammar#Verbs Verb Conjugation in Ojibwe]. The Mi'gmaq negated affix is ''w'' or ''u'' which is very closely related to the Proto-Algonquian form for negation which is is ''*-w'' ( [http://kuscholarworks.ku.edu/dspace/bitstream/1808/440/1/ling.wp.v15.n2.paper6.pdf Proulx, 1990] ). ''w'' or ''u'' are very closely related phonetically since ''w'' is the semivowel corresponding to the vowel ''u''. Bear in mind that during the elicitation sessions, sometimes it was unsure whether to use ''w'' or ''u''.

Negation in Mi'gmaq consists of adding ''mu'' or ''ma'' then the verb conjugated in the negated verb form. After ''mu'' or ''ma'' the verb must always contain a negative particle. We must think of these two things as inseparable. ''mu'' always comes before the negative conjugated verb in the present or past, and ''ma'' always comes before future or if the prefix ''gis'' ('can', 'to be able to') is attached to the verb. All other prefixes abide by the rules ''mu'' before present or past and ''ma'' before future. There are other particles that take the negated form of the verb, but it is obvious that these particles express a negated idea.

Please note as well that in some of the studies on Mi'gmaq and Algonquian languages the term 'nonaffirmative' is used to describe the negated form. For consistency in this report, I will use the term 'negated' to indicate the form of the verb which is the opposite of affirmative. 'Nonaffirmative' and 'negated' however refer to the same process of negation.

= Conjugation of the Negated Verb =
I have selected the verb ''mijji'' (to eat). Please note that some resources spell this like ''mijji'' where other spell it ''miji'' ([http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED136614.pdf Micmac Teaching Grammar, 1976]). I have selected the spelling from [http://www.mikmaqonline.org/servlet/dictionaryFrameSet.html?arg0=mijjit&method=searchFromMikmaq the Migmaq talking dictionary]. It is also important to note that the Micmac Teaching Grammar uses an orthography that is different of all other orthographies used with Mi'gmaq. I will indicate which terms they are and give the Listuguj equivalent orthographical manner of writing them.

The simplified formula for the conjugation in the negated form: the base form + ''u'' or ''w'' + person ending ([http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED136614.pdf Micmac Teaching Grammar, 1976])
The base form for intransitive verbs is always the verb in the first person singular. For example I eat is ''mijji''. Now to create the second person singular we add the ending -''n'' denoting second person singular and get the form ''mijjin''. For another type of verb (henceforth referred to as the ''a'' verbs) we take the base form ''amalga-'' and add -''n'' to get ''amalgan'' (you dance) and to get the first person singular we add -''i''. Please note that it has been hypothesized that there are at least eleven different conjugations. We will only be dealing with a couple here. Because of reasons of time limitation, I was not able to elicit all eleven types but when there is a difference in conjugation, that will be noted. Note that in the plural the ''u'' or ''w'' comes after ''-ulti-''. This could be due the the fact that ''-ulti-'' is the plural affix that attaches to the base form of the verb and does not convey anything about the tense of the verb, rather it is used to denote that the verb is plural. Thus the ''u'' or ''w'' comes right before the tense marker which is always at the end of the verb. For the first person singular in present there is a null tense marker at the end of some verbs (for example the ''-i'' verbs) thus the negative marker is at the end.

== Present Tense ==
First is a comparison of the affirmative and negated paradigms of the verb ''mijji'' ('eat').

{| class="wikitable"
|+ mijji- 'eat'
|-
! scope="col" colspan="2"| ↓person / number→
! scope="col" | SG
! scope="col" | DU
! scope="col" | PL
|-
! scope="row" rowspan="2"| 1
! scope="row"| 13
| rowspan="2" | mijji
|mijjieg
|mijjultieg
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| mijji'gw
| mijjulti'gw
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2" | 2
| mijjin
| mijjioq
| mijjultioq
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2"| 3
| mijjit
| mijjijig
| mijjultijig
|-
|}

{| class="wikitable"
|+ mu mijji- 'not eat'
|-
! scope="col" colspan="2"| ↓person / number→
! scope="col" | SG
! scope="col" | DU
! scope="col" | PL
|-
! scope="row" rowspan="2"| 1
! scope="row"| 13
| rowspan="2" | mu mijjiw
| mu mijjiweg
| mu mijjultiweg
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| mu mijjigw
| mu mijjultigw
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2" | 2
| mu mijjiun
| mu mijjiwoq
| mu mijjultiwoq
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2"| 3
| mu mijjigw
| mu mijji'gw
| mu mijjulti'gw
|-
|}

The word ''mu'' signifies negation. When ''mu'' is in front of the verb, the verb must also be conjugated in the negative form. In the above table we see the intrusion of the sound ''u'', ''ew'' or ''w''. The following table illustrates the endings for the present negative tense, keeping in mind ''mu'' must ALWAYS come right before the negated verb. When ''mu'' precedes a verb it must ALWAYS be in the negated form.

Below is a table that summarizes the VAI -i stem negative person endings in present conjugation. Inanimate [IN] conjugation was taken from the Micmac Grammar (1976, pg 155).

{| class="wikitable"
|+ VAI -i stem negative present person endings
|-
! scope="col" colspan="2"| ↓person / number→
! scope="col" | SG
! scope="col" | DU
! scope="col" | PL
|-
! scope="row" rowspan="2"| 1
! scope="row"| 13
| rowspan="2" |-u
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2" | 2
| -
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2"| 3.AN
| -
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2"| 3.IN
| -
| -
| -
|-
|}

The forms for the first person dual and plural in the exclusive and inclusive forms are the same. As shown by other data, the dual form seems to be in the process of disappearing. This is one such example where the dual form does not exist for the plural first person. Some younger speakers do not use the dual form at all so it is not surprising that we find a gap in the dual form here. All this is according to the speaker but if we followed the pattern of the previous forms we would expect the dual form for the inclusive and exclusive first person to be ''-ieweg''. "When the verb is negated, then the -g third person is ALWAYS found" (Micmac Grammar, 1976 pg 93).

Below is a comparison of different verbs to give an idea of how to conjugate different types of verbs in the negated form. All forms are conjugated in the present singular third person animate. The form of -''elie-'' was taken from Micmac Grammar (pg 155). For more detail about these forms see [[VAI]].

{| class="wikitable"
! VAI stem || Base Form || Gloss || Affirmative || Gloss || Negated || Gloss
|-
| -i
| mijji-
| eat
| mijjit
| s/he eats
| mu mijjigw
| s/he does not eat
|-
| -a
| amalga-
| dance
| amalgat
| s/he dances
| mu amalgagw
| s/he does not dance
|-
| -a'si
| ala'si-
| go around
| ala'sit
| s/he goes around
| mu ala'sigw
| s/he does not go around
|-
| -e
| elie-
| go
| eliet
| s/he goes
| mu eliegw
| s/he does not go
|-
|}

For verb conjugations in the affirmative please see [http://firstnationhelp.com/ali/posters/pdf/verb_conjugation.pdf Mi'kmaq Verb Conjugation]. As you can see, this site uses the verb ''mijisi'' meaning 'to eat'. In Listuguj this is not used as the word for to eat because it sounds too close for the verb ''mejisi'' 'to excrete'.

=== Transitive ===
Below is the conjugation in present of a transitive verb that takes an inanimate object.

{| class="wikitable" style="text-align:center"
|+ VTI Conjugation Class 1: -m class
|-
! scope="col" | ↓subject / object→
! scope="col" | 0SG
! scope="col" | 0PL
|-
! scope="row" | 1
| malqutm
| malqutmann
|-
! scope="row" | 13
| malqutmeg
| malqutmegl
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| malqutmu'g
| malqutmu'gul
|-
! scope="row" | 2
| malqutmn
| malqutmnn
|-
! scope="row" | 2PL
| malqutmoq
| malqutmoqol
|-
! scope="row" | 3
| malqutmeg
| malqutmegl
|-
! scope="row" | 3PL
| malqutmi'tij
| malqutmi'titl
|}

{| class="wikitable" style="text-align:center"
|+ VTI Negative Conjugation Class 1: -m class
|-
! scope="col" | ↓subject / object→
! scope="col" | 0SG
! scope="col" | 0PL
|-
! scope="row" | 1
| mu malqutmu
| mu malqutmuann
|-
! scope="row" | 13
| mu malqutmueg
| mu malqutmuegl
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| mu malqutmugg
| mu malqutmuggul
|-
! scope="row" | 2
| mu malqutmu'n
| mu malqutmu'nn
|-
! scope="row" | 2PL
| mu malqutmuoq
| mu malqutmuoqol
|-
! scope="row" | 3
| mu malqutmug
| mu malqutmugul
|-
! scope="row" | 3PL
| mu malqutmi'tigw
| mu malqutmi'tigul
|-
|}

{| class="wikitable" style="text-align:center"
|+ VTI Negative Conjugation Class 1: -m class
|-
! scope="col" | ↓subject / object→
! scope="col" | 0SG
! scope="col" | 0PL
|-
! scope="row" | 1
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 13
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 12
|
|
|-
! scope="row" | 2
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 2PL
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 3
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 3PL
| -
| -
|-
|}

== Imperative ==
Here is the formation of the affirmative imperative:
{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijji-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 2 Second person
| mijji
| mijjigw
| mijjultigw
|-
|}

Now we compare it to the negated:
{| class="wikitable"
! ''mutt mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 2 Second person
| mutt mijjiw
| mutt mijjinew
| mutt mijjultinew
|-
|}

== Past Tense ==
Again for the past we compare the past and the negated past.

{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| mijjiap
| mijjieg'p
| mijjultieg'p
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| mijji'gup
| mijjulti'gup
|-
| 2 Second person
| mijjit'p
| mijjioqop
| mijjultioqop
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| mijjip
| mijjipni'g
| mijjultipni'g
|}

Now let us look at the negated forms.

{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| mu mijjiwap
| mu mijjiweg'p
| mu mijjultiweg'p
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| mu mijjiwgup
| mu mijjultiwgup/mijjultiggup
|-
| 2 Second person
| mu mijjiwt'p
| mu mijjiwoqop
| mu mijjultiwoqop
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| mu mijjigup
| mu mijjigupnig
| mu mijjultigupnig
|}

Thus this would be the conjugation of the negated form:

{| class="wikitable"
! Negated Past||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| -
| -
| -
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| -
| -
|-
| 2 Second person
| -
| -
| -
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| -
|
|
|}

For the third person the -''ug'p'' can change to -''weg'p'' for example:

<gl>
\gll Mu ala'ti-we-g'p
not go-NEG-SG.PAST
\trans She didn't go
</gl>

== Future Tense ==
First let us compare the affirmative tense for eat:

{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| mijjit's/mijjia's(List)
| mijjitesnen
| mijjultitesnen
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| mijjitesnu
| mijjultitesnu
|-
| 2 Second person
| mijjit'sg
| mijjitoqs'p
| mijjultitoqs'p
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| mijjitew
| mijjitaq
| mijjultitaq
|}
I was not able to elicit dual forms.

We compare the future affirmative with the negated below:

{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| ma' mijjiw
| ma' mijjiweg
| ma' mijjultiweg
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| ma' mijjigw
| ma' mijjultigw
|-
| 2 Second person
| ma' mijjiun
| ma' mijjiwoq
| ma' mijjultiwoq
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| ma' mijjigw
| ma' mijji'gw
| ma' mijjulti'gw
|}
NOTE: In the future the ''mu'' changes to ''ma' '' !! Like ''mu'', ''ma'' must always come before the verb conjugated in the negative future.
The correspondent was not able to produce a dual form in the future.

Now here is a paradigm of the negated endings in the future.

{| class="wikitable"
! Negated Future||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| -
| -
| -
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
|
| -
| -
|-
| 2 Second person
| -
|
|
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
|
|
|
|}

As you may have noticed the future tense is easy! The verbs take the same endings as the negated present tense but the ''mu'' is replaced with ''ma'' thus indicating future.

== When negation is used ==

When the verb is negated there must always find a negative particle (like ''mu'' or ''ma''). If not the sentence is ungrammatical as shown below:

<gl>
\gll *gis-wissugwatige-w
can-cook.1-NEG
\trans I cannot cook (intended meaning)
</gl>

The only form of the above sentence must be:

<gl>
\gll ma gis-wissugwatige-w
NEG can-cook.1-NEG
\trans I cannot cook
</gl>

Thus it is seen that ''ma'' comes before the verb, now making the sentence grammatical.

''ma'' always precedes the future tense AND when the ''gis'' prefix is attached to the verb conjugated in the present for example:

<gl>
\gll ma gis-amalga-w-g
NEG can-dance-NEG-3
\trans s/he cannot dance
</gl>

There are some expressions that always take the negative form of the verb such as ''me menga'' (not yet) and ''mowen'' (nobody) that take the negative form of the verb: (examples from [http://www.mikmaqonline.org/ Mi'gmaq Online Dictionary])

<gl>
\gll me menag newt ajetten-u-g
NEG yet one time-NEG-3
\trans it is not one o’clock yet
</gl>

<gl>
\gll mo-wen mijie-w-g
NEG-who eat-NEG-3
\trans no one is eating
</gl>

<gl>
\gll moqwa' goqwei eign-u-g
no thing be-NEG-3
\trans there is nothing there
</gl>

Below is a list of common particles after which the negated form is used. This list is not complete but these are the most common forms.

{| class="wikitable"
! Particle || When used || Translation
|-
| ''mu''
| before negated present and past
| not
|-
| ''mutt''
| before negated imperative
| do not
|-
| ''lpa mu''
| before negated present and past
| not even
|-
| ''mowen''
| before negated present, past and future
| no one/nobody
|-
| ''moqwa' goqwei'''
| before negated present, past and future
| nothing
|-
| ''me menag''
| before negated verb
| not yet
|-
| ''ma''
| before negated future verb and preverb ''gis'' (can)
| not
|-
|}

''moqwa' goqwei'' is also spelled ''mu goqwei'' and a variant of this is ''mu'' + negated verb + ''goqwei'' when used in object position. It is inanimate. As in the following example:

<gl>
\gll mu malqutem-u goqwei
NEG eat.1>0-NEG what
\trans I eat nothing
</gl>

== Negative Concord ==
As can be seen above, Mi'gmaq is a negative concord language. Negative concord is where "double or multiple negative[s] [do] not express an affirmative but a negative" (van der Wouden & Zwarts, 1992). This is similar to French ''Je n'ai vue personne'' 'I have seen nobody' where both the ''ne'' and ''personne'' are both negative but the resulting sentence is negative, rather than each cancelling the other out resulting in a affirmative sentence, i.e. 'I have seen someone'. Mi'gmaq has negation marked in two places with both negative particles, i.e. ''mu'' & ''ma'', and a negative conjugation of the verb, i.e. with ''-u'' or ''-w'' added. Compare examples <glr id="1"/> and <glr id="2"/>.

<gl id="1">
\gll lpa'tuj eigu-p
boy be.there.PST-SG
\trans the boy was there
</gl>

<gl id="2">
\gll lpa'tuj mu eimu-g-u-p
boy NEG be.there-PST-NEG-SG
\trans the boy was not there
</gl>

= Word Order =
The negative particle (or possibly affix) ''mu'' always appears before the verb it negates. Although words can intervene between ''mu'' and the verb it negates, ''mu'' must always precede the verb.

<gl>
\gll Mali mu amal-gag-u-p
Mali NEG dance-PAST-NEG-SG
\trans Mali did not dance
</gl>

<gl>
\gll mu Mali amal-gag-u-p
NEG Mali dance-PAST-NEG-SG
\trans Mali did not dance
</gl>

Placement of ''mu'' post-verbally results in ungrammaticality, as illustrated below.

<gl>
\gll lpa'tuj mu eimug-u-p
boy NEG be.there.PST-NEG-SG
\trans the boy was not there
</gl>

Acceptable word orders:
*mu eimugup lpa'tuj
*mu lpa'tuj eimugup

Unacceptable word orders:
* *eimugup lpa'tuj mu
* *eimugup mu lpa'tuj
* *lpa'tuj eimugup mu

Furthermore, with regards to word order, it appears that negation must come right before the constituent it negates. Here is an example sentence without negation:

<gl>
\gll ula na lpa'tuj ta'n egitgup wigatign
this DEM boy that read.PST book
\trans this is the boy that read the book
</gl>

If we want to negate the first clause, as to say "This is '''not''' the boy that read the book", negation must directly precede 'boy'.

<gl>
\gll ula na mu lpa'tuj ta'n egitgup wigatign
this DEM NEG boy that read.PST book
\trans this is not the boy that read the book
</gl>

The following word orders for negation in the first clause are impossible:
* *ula na lpa'tuj mu...
* *ula mu na lpa'tuj...
* *mu ula na lpa'tuj...

If we want to negate the second clause, as to say "This is the boy that did '''not''' read the book", the word order may be varied, as long as negation comes before the verb (as discussed previously).

== Scope of Negation ==
As stated above, ''mu'' always comes before the verb. There may be particles that intrude between ''mu'' and the negated verb, but as long as ''mu'' comes before the negated verb, the structure is grammatical. [http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED136614.pdf Micmac Grammar, 1976] Sometimes the meaning of the sentence can change depending on the position of ''mu''.

<gl>
\gll egjitm Mali mu amal-gag-u-p
possible Mali NEG dance-PST-NEG-SG
\trans it is true that Mali did not dance
</gl>

<gl>
\gll mu egjitm Mali amal-gag-u-p
NEG possible Mali dance-PST.NEG.SG
\trans it is not true that Mali danced
</gl>

We would also expect phrases with adverb-like particles translatable as "it is possible" or "it is true" or "it is obvious" would also vary regarding negation.

=Language change and negation=
Often I was not able to elicit both the dual and plural forms of a verb. There are many times when I could only elicit the dual form, or times when the dual and plural forms were the same. It has been noted by our consultants that younger speakers are not using the plural forms but are using the dual form to mean both dual and plural. This seems be a language change happening currently in the speech community where the younger generation is leading the change. As noted in the paradigm above for 'eat' in the negated present tense, both dual and plural forms are the same. Here it seems that the plural form is used for both dual and plural meanings. This would strongly suggest a change happening in the speech community.

=References=
Clark, Jeremiah S. "A Dictionary of the Micmac Language." Rand's Micmac Dictionary. Charlottetown, PEI: The Patriot Publishing Company, 1902. Print.

Delisle, Gill L., and Manny L. Metallic. Micmac Teaching Grammar. Ecowi, QC: Thunderbird Press, 1976. Print.

L'Abbe Maillard, M. Grammaire De La Langue Mikmaque. New York: Presse Cramoisy de Jean-Marie Shea, 1864. Print.

Metallic, Janine. "Mi'gmaq Elicitation Session for Field Methods of Linguistics." Ed. Class, Carol Little and LING415. Montreal, QC: n/a, 2011. Print.

Payne, Thomas Edward. Describing Morphosyntax: a Guide for Field Linguists. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge UP, 2008. Print.

Paul-Martin, Patsy. "Mi'kmaq Verb Conjugation." Ed. Orthography, Mi'kmaq Talking Posters Smith/Francis. Truto, NS: Eastern Woodland Print Communications, 2011. Print.

Proulx, Paul. "Proto-Algonquian Verb Inflection." Studies in Native American Languages 15.2 (1990): 100-45. Print.

van der Wouden, Ton, and Frans Zwarts. "Negative Concord." D. Gilbers and S. Looyenga (eds), Language and Cognition 2. Yearbook 1992 Linguistic Theory and Knowledge Representation of the University of Groningen (1992): 317-31. Print.

Negation

2014-08-07T19:01:38Z

Carol: /* Future Tense */

=Introduction=
Negation is the process of turning affirmative statements into the opposite form. For example, the negative equivalent of affirmative sentence, ''I am eating'' is ''I am not eating''. In English there are a few processes at work. ''not'' must always come with an auxiliary verb like the verb 'to have' and 'to be'. In Mi'gmaq, with its extremely detailed and expansive verb conjugations in the present, it is not surprising that the negated conjugation of verbs is just as detailed and expansive as they are in the affirmative.

To start off any commentary on negation, it seems fitting to start of with the word "no" which is ''moqwa'' in Mi'gmaq. (The opposite of this is ''e'e'' , meaning "yes".) Negation in Mi'gmaq is similar to that of Obijwe in that there is both an affix that occurs between the verb and the person marker and a word that comes before the verb denoting negation. See [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ojibwe_grammar#Verbs Verb Conjugation in Ojibwe]. The Mi'gmaq negated affix is ''w'' or ''u'' which is very closely related to the Proto-Algonquian form for negation which is is ''*-w'' ( [http://kuscholarworks.ku.edu/dspace/bitstream/1808/440/1/ling.wp.v15.n2.paper6.pdf Proulx, 1990] ). ''w'' or ''u'' are very closely related phonetically since ''w'' is the semivowel corresponding to the vowel ''u''. Bear in mind that during the elicitation sessions, sometimes it was unsure whether to use ''w'' or ''u''.

Negation in Mi'gmaq consists of adding ''mu'' or ''ma'' then the verb conjugated in the negated verb form. After ''mu'' or ''ma'' the verb must always contain a negative particle. We must think of these two things as inseparable. ''mu'' always comes before the negative conjugated verb in the present or past, and ''ma'' always comes before future or if the prefix ''gis'' ('can', 'to be able to') is attached to the verb. All other prefixes abide by the rules ''mu'' before present or past and ''ma'' before future. There are other particles that take the negated form of the verb, but it is obvious that these particles express a negated idea.

Please note as well that in some of the studies on Mi'gmaq and Algonquian languages the term 'nonaffirmative' is used to describe the negated form. For consistency in this report, I will use the term 'negated' to indicate the form of the verb which is the opposite of affirmative. 'Nonaffirmative' and 'negated' however refer to the same process of negation.

= Conjugation of the Negated Verb =
I have selected the verb ''mijji'' (to eat). Please note that some resources spell this like ''mijji'' where other spell it ''miji'' ([http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED136614.pdf Micmac Teaching Grammar, 1976]). I have selected the spelling from [http://www.mikmaqonline.org/servlet/dictionaryFrameSet.html?arg0=mijjit&method=searchFromMikmaq the Migmaq talking dictionary]. It is also important to note that the Micmac Teaching Grammar uses an orthography that is different of all other orthographies used with Mi'gmaq. I will indicate which terms they are and give the Listuguj equivalent orthographical manner of writing them.

The simplified formula for the conjugation in the negated form: the base form + ''u'' or ''w'' + person ending ([http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED136614.pdf Micmac Teaching Grammar, 1976])
The base form for intransitive verbs is always the verb in the first person singular. For example I eat is ''mijji''. Now to create the second person singular we add the ending -''n'' denoting second person singular and get the form ''mijjin''. For another type of verb (henceforth referred to as the ''a'' verbs) we take the base form ''amalga-'' and add -''n'' to get ''amalgan'' (you dance) and to get the first person singular we add -''i''. Please note that it has been hypothesized that there are at least eleven different conjugations. We will only be dealing with a couple here. Because of reasons of time limitation, I was not able to elicit all eleven types but when there is a difference in conjugation, that will be noted. Note that in the plural the ''u'' or ''w'' comes after ''-ulti-''. This could be due the the fact that ''-ulti-'' is the plural affix that attaches to the base form of the verb and does not convey anything about the tense of the verb, rather it is used to denote that the verb is plural. Thus the ''u'' or ''w'' comes right before the tense marker which is always at the end of the verb. For the first person singular in present there is a null tense marker at the end of some verbs (for example the ''-i'' verbs) thus the negative marker is at the end.

== Present Tense ==
First is a comparison of the affirmative and negated paradigms of the verb ''mijji'' ('eat').

{| class="wikitable"
|+ mijji- 'eat'
|-
! scope="col" colspan="2"| ↓person / number→
! scope="col" | SG
! scope="col" | DU
! scope="col" | PL
|-
! scope="row" rowspan="2"| 1
! scope="row"| 13
| rowspan="2" | mijji
|mijjieg
|mijjultieg
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| mijji'gw
| mijjulti'gw
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2" | 2
| mijjin
| mijjioq
| mijjultioq
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2"| 3
| mijjit
| mijjijig
| mijjultijig
|-
|}

{| class="wikitable"
|+ mu mijji- 'not eat'
|-
! scope="col" colspan="2"| ↓person / number→
! scope="col" | SG
! scope="col" | DU
! scope="col" | PL
|-
! scope="row" rowspan="2"| 1
! scope="row"| 13
| rowspan="2" | mu mijjiw
| mu mijjiweg
| mu mijjultiweg
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| mu mijjigw
| mu mijjultigw
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2" | 2
| mu mijjiun
| mu mijjiwoq
| mu mijjultiwoq
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2"| 3
| mu mijjigw
| mu mijji'gw
| mu mijjulti'gw
|-
|}

The word ''mu'' signifies negation. When ''mu'' is in front of the verb, the verb must also be conjugated in the negative form. In the above table we see the intrusion of the sound ''u'', ''ew'' or ''w''. The following table illustrates the endings for the present negative tense, keeping in mind ''mu'' must ALWAYS come right before the negated verb. When ''mu'' precedes a verb it must ALWAYS be in the negated form.

Below is a table that summarizes the VAI -i stem negative person endings in present conjugation. Inanimate [IN] conjugation was taken from the Micmac Grammar (1976, pg 155).

{| class="wikitable"
|+ VAI -i stem negative present person endings
|-
! scope="col" colspan="2"| ↓person / number→
! scope="col" | SG
! scope="col" | DU
! scope="col" | PL
|-
! scope="row" rowspan="2"| 1
! scope="row"| 13
| rowspan="2" |-u
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2" | 2
| -
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2"| 3.AN
| -
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2"| 3.IN
| -
| -
| -
|-
|}

The forms for the first person dual and plural in the exclusive and inclusive forms are the same. As shown by other data, the dual form seems to be in the process of disappearing. This is one such example where the dual form does not exist for the plural first person. Some younger speakers do not use the dual form at all so it is not surprising that we find a gap in the dual form here. All this is according to the speaker but if we followed the pattern of the previous forms we would expect the dual form for the inclusive and exclusive first person to be ''-ieweg''. "When the verb is negated, then the -g third person is ALWAYS found" (Micmac Grammar, 1976 pg 93).

Below is a comparison of different verbs to give an idea of how to conjugate different types of verbs in the negated form. All forms are conjugated in the present singular third person animate. The form of -''elie-'' was taken from Micmac Grammar (pg 155). For more detail about these forms see [[VAI]].

{| class="wikitable"
! VAI stem || Base Form || Gloss || Affirmative || Gloss || Negated || Gloss
|-
| -i
| mijji-
| eat
| mijjit
| s/he eats
| mu mijjigw
| s/he does not eat
|-
| -a
| amalga-
| dance
| amalgat
| s/he dances
| mu amalgagw
| s/he does not dance
|-
| -a'si
| ala'si-
| go around
| ala'sit
| s/he goes around
| mu ala'sigw
| s/he does not go around
|-
| -e
| elie-
| go
| eliet
| s/he goes
| mu eliegw
| s/he does not go
|-
|}

For verb conjugations in the affirmative please see [http://firstnationhelp.com/ali/posters/pdf/verb_conjugation.pdf Mi'kmaq Verb Conjugation]. As you can see, this site uses the verb ''mijisi'' meaning 'to eat'. In Listuguj this is not used as the word for to eat because it sounds too close for the verb ''mejisi'' 'to excrete'.

=== Transitive ===
Below is the conjugation in present of a transitive verb that takes an inanimate object.

{| class="wikitable" style="text-align:center"
|+ VTI Conjugation Class 1: -m class
|-
! scope="col" | ↓subject / object→
! scope="col" | 0SG
! scope="col" | 0PL
|-
! scope="row" | 1
| malqutm
| malqutmann
|-
! scope="row" | 13
| malqutmeg
| malqutmegl
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| malqutmu'g
| malqutmu'gul
|-
! scope="row" | 2
| malqutmn
| malqutmnn
|-
! scope="row" | 2PL
| malqutmoq
| malqutmoqol
|-
! scope="row" | 3
| malqutmeg
| malqutmegl
|-
! scope="row" | 3PL
| malqutmi'tij
| malqutmi'titl
|}

{| class="wikitable" style="text-align:center"
|+ VTI Negative Conjugation Class 1: -m class
|-
! scope="col" | ↓subject / object→
! scope="col" | 0SG
! scope="col" | 0PL
|-
! scope="row" | 1
| mu malqutmu
| mu malqutmuann
|-
! scope="row" | 13
| mu malqutmueg
| mu malqutmuegl
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| mu malqutmugg
| mu malqutmuggul
|-
! scope="row" | 2
| mu malqutmu'n
| mu malqutmu'nn
|-
! scope="row" | 2PL
| mu malqutmuoq
| mu malqutmuoqol
|-
! scope="row" | 3
| mu malqutmug
| mu malqutmugul
|-
! scope="row" | 3PL
| mu malqutmi'tigw
| mu malqutmi'tigul
|-
|}

{| class="wikitable" style="text-align:center"
|+ VTI Negative Conjugation Class 1: -m class
|-
! scope="col" | ↓subject / object→
! scope="col" | 0SG
! scope="col" | 0PL
|-
! scope="row" | 1
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 13
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 12
|
|
|-
! scope="row" | 2
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 2PL
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 3
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 3PL
| -
| -
|-
|}

== Imperative ==
Here is the formation of the affirmative imperative:
{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijji-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 2 Second person
| mijji
| mijjigw
| mijjultigw
|-
|}

Now we compare it to the negated:
{| class="wikitable"
! ''mutt mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 2 Second person
| mutt mijjiw
| mutt mijjinew
| mutt mijjultinew
|-
|}

== Past Tense ==
Again for the past we compare the past and the negated past.

{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| mijjiap
| mijjieg'p
| mijjultieg'p
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| mijji'gup
| mijjulti'gup
|-
| 2 Second person
| mijjit'p
| mijjioqop
| mijjultioqop
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| mijjip
| mijjipni'g
| mijjultipni'g
|}

Now let us look at the negated forms.

{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| mu mijjiwap
| mu mijjiweg'p
| mu mijjultiweg'p
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| mu mijjiwgup
| mu mijjultiwgup/mijjultiggup
|-
| 2 Second person
| mu mijjiwt'p
| mu mijjiwoqop
| mu mijjultiwoqop
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| mu mijjigup
| mu mijjigupnig
| mu mijjultigupnig
|}

Thus this would be the conjugation of the negated form:

{| class="wikitable"
! Negated Past||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| -
| -
| -
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| -
| -
|-
| 2 Second person
| -
| -
| -
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| -
|
|
|}

For the third person the -''ug'p'' can change to -''weg'p'' for example:

<gl>
\gll Mu ala'ti-we-g'p
not go-NEG-SG.PAST
\trans She didn't go
</gl>

== Future Tense ==
First let us compare the affirmative tense for eat:

{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| mijjit's/mijjia's(List)
| mijjitesnen
| mijjultitesnen
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| mijjitesnu
| mijjultitesnu
|-
| 2 Second person
| mijjit'sg
| mijjitoqs'p
| mijjultitoqs'p
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| mijjitew
| mijjitaq
| mijjultitaq
|}
I was not able to elicit dual forms.

We compare the future affirmative with the negated below:

{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| ma' mijjiw
| ma' mijjiweg
| ma' mijjultiweg
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| ma' mijjigw
| ma' mijjultigw
|-
| 2 Second person
| ma' mijjiun
| ma' mijjiwoq
| ma' mijjultiwoq
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| ma' mijjigw
| ma' mijji'gw
| ma' mijjulti'gw
|}
NOTE: In the future the ''mu'' changes to ''ma' '' !! Like ''mu'', ''ma'' must always come before the verb conjugated in the negative future.
The correspondent was not able to produce a dual form in the future.

Now here is a paradigm of the negated endings in the future.

{| class="wikitable"
! Negated Future||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| -ew
| -ug
| -ug
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| -ug
| -ug
|-
| 2 Second person
| -iwn
| ?
| ?
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| -ewg
| ''n/a''
| -ultiwoq
|}

As you may have noticed the future tense is easy! The verbs take the same endings as the negated present tense but the ''mu'' is replaced with ''ma'' thus indicating future.

== When negation is used ==

When the verb is negated there must always find a negative particle (like ''mu'' or ''ma''). If not the sentence is ungrammatical as shown below:

<gl>
\gll *gis-wissugwatige-w
can-cook.1-NEG
\trans I cannot cook (intended meaning)
</gl>

The only form of the above sentence must be:

<gl>
\gll ma gis-wissugwatige-w
NEG can-cook.1-NEG
\trans I cannot cook
</gl>

Thus it is seen that ''ma'' comes before the verb, now making the sentence grammatical.

''ma'' always precedes the future tense AND when the ''gis'' prefix is attached to the verb conjugated in the present for example:

<gl>
\gll ma gis-amalga-w-g
NEG can-dance-NEG-3
\trans s/he cannot dance
</gl>

There are some expressions that always take the negative form of the verb such as ''me menga'' (not yet) and ''mowen'' (nobody) that take the negative form of the verb: (examples from [http://www.mikmaqonline.org/ Mi'gmaq Online Dictionary])

<gl>
\gll me menag newt ajetten-u-g
NEG yet one time-NEG-3
\trans it is not one o’clock yet
</gl>

<gl>
\gll mo-wen mijie-w-g
NEG-who eat-NEG-3
\trans no one is eating
</gl>

<gl>
\gll moqwa' goqwei eign-u-g
no thing be-NEG-3
\trans there is nothing there
</gl>

Below is a list of common particles after which the negated form is used. This list is not complete but these are the most common forms.

{| class="wikitable"
! Particle || When used || Translation
|-
| ''mu''
| before negated present and past
| not
|-
| ''mutt''
| before negated imperative
| do not
|-
| ''lpa mu''
| before negated present and past
| not even
|-
| ''mowen''
| before negated present, past and future
| no one/nobody
|-
| ''moqwa' goqwei'''
| before negated present, past and future
| nothing
|-
| ''me menag''
| before negated verb
| not yet
|-
| ''ma''
| before negated future verb and preverb ''gis'' (can)
| not
|-
|}

''moqwa' goqwei'' is also spelled ''mu goqwei'' and a variant of this is ''mu'' + negated verb + ''goqwei'' when used in object position. It is inanimate. As in the following example:

<gl>
\gll mu malqutem-u goqwei
NEG eat.1>0-NEG what
\trans I eat nothing
</gl>

== Negative Concord ==
As can be seen above, Mi'gmaq is a negative concord language. Negative concord is where "double or multiple negative[s] [do] not express an affirmative but a negative" (van der Wouden & Zwarts, 1992). This is similar to French ''Je n'ai vue personne'' 'I have seen nobody' where both the ''ne'' and ''personne'' are both negative but the resulting sentence is negative, rather than each cancelling the other out resulting in a affirmative sentence, i.e. 'I have seen someone'. Mi'gmaq has negation marked in two places with both negative particles, i.e. ''mu'' & ''ma'', and a negative conjugation of the verb, i.e. with ''-u'' or ''-w'' added. Compare examples <glr id="1"/> and <glr id="2"/>.

<gl id="1">
\gll lpa'tuj eigu-p
boy be.there.PST-SG
\trans the boy was there
</gl>

<gl id="2">
\gll lpa'tuj mu eimu-g-u-p
boy NEG be.there-PST-NEG-SG
\trans the boy was not there
</gl>

= Word Order =
The negative particle (or possibly affix) ''mu'' always appears before the verb it negates. Although words can intervene between ''mu'' and the verb it negates, ''mu'' must always precede the verb.

<gl>
\gll Mali mu amal-gag-u-p
Mali NEG dance-PAST-NEG-SG
\trans Mali did not dance
</gl>

<gl>
\gll mu Mali amal-gag-u-p
NEG Mali dance-PAST-NEG-SG
\trans Mali did not dance
</gl>

Placement of ''mu'' post-verbally results in ungrammaticality, as illustrated below.

<gl>
\gll lpa'tuj mu eimug-u-p
boy NEG be.there.PST-NEG-SG
\trans the boy was not there
</gl>

Acceptable word orders:
*mu eimugup lpa'tuj
*mu lpa'tuj eimugup

Unacceptable word orders:
* *eimugup lpa'tuj mu
* *eimugup mu lpa'tuj
* *lpa'tuj eimugup mu

Furthermore, with regards to word order, it appears that negation must come right before the constituent it negates. Here is an example sentence without negation:

<gl>
\gll ula na lpa'tuj ta'n egitgup wigatign
this DEM boy that read.PST book
\trans this is the boy that read the book
</gl>

If we want to negate the first clause, as to say "This is '''not''' the boy that read the book", negation must directly precede 'boy'.

<gl>
\gll ula na mu lpa'tuj ta'n egitgup wigatign
this DEM NEG boy that read.PST book
\trans this is not the boy that read the book
</gl>

The following word orders for negation in the first clause are impossible:
* *ula na lpa'tuj mu...
* *ula mu na lpa'tuj...
* *mu ula na lpa'tuj...

If we want to negate the second clause, as to say "This is the boy that did '''not''' read the book", the word order may be varied, as long as negation comes before the verb (as discussed previously).

== Scope of Negation ==
As stated above, ''mu'' always comes before the verb. There may be particles that intrude between ''mu'' and the negated verb, but as long as ''mu'' comes before the negated verb, the structure is grammatical. [http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED136614.pdf Micmac Grammar, 1976] Sometimes the meaning of the sentence can change depending on the position of ''mu''.

<gl>
\gll egjitm Mali mu amal-gag-u-p
possible Mali NEG dance-PST-NEG-SG
\trans it is true that Mali did not dance
</gl>

<gl>
\gll mu egjitm Mali amal-gag-u-p
NEG possible Mali dance-PST.NEG.SG
\trans it is not true that Mali danced
</gl>

We would also expect phrases with adverb-like particles translatable as "it is possible" or "it is true" or "it is obvious" would also vary regarding negation.

=Language change and negation=
Often I was not able to elicit both the dual and plural forms of a verb. There are many times when I could only elicit the dual form, or times when the dual and plural forms were the same. It has been noted by our consultants that younger speakers are not using the plural forms but are using the dual form to mean both dual and plural. This seems be a language change happening currently in the speech community where the younger generation is leading the change. As noted in the paradigm above for 'eat' in the negated present tense, both dual and plural forms are the same. Here it seems that the plural form is used for both dual and plural meanings. This would strongly suggest a change happening in the speech community.

=References=
Clark, Jeremiah S. "A Dictionary of the Micmac Language." Rand's Micmac Dictionary. Charlottetown, PEI: The Patriot Publishing Company, 1902. Print.

Delisle, Gill L., and Manny L. Metallic. Micmac Teaching Grammar. Ecowi, QC: Thunderbird Press, 1976. Print.

L'Abbe Maillard, M. Grammaire De La Langue Mikmaque. New York: Presse Cramoisy de Jean-Marie Shea, 1864. Print.

Metallic, Janine. "Mi'gmaq Elicitation Session for Field Methods of Linguistics." Ed. Class, Carol Little and LING415. Montreal, QC: n/a, 2011. Print.

Payne, Thomas Edward. Describing Morphosyntax: a Guide for Field Linguists. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge UP, 2008. Print.

Paul-Martin, Patsy. "Mi'kmaq Verb Conjugation." Ed. Orthography, Mi'kmaq Talking Posters Smith/Francis. Truto, NS: Eastern Woodland Print Communications, 2011. Print.

Proulx, Paul. "Proto-Algonquian Verb Inflection." Studies in Native American Languages 15.2 (1990): 100-45. Print.

van der Wouden, Ton, and Frans Zwarts. "Negative Concord." D. Gilbers and S. Looyenga (eds), Language and Cognition 2. Yearbook 1992 Linguistic Theory and Knowledge Representation of the University of Groningen (1992): 317-31. Print.

Negation

2014-08-07T18:58:34Z

Carol: /* Future Tense */

=Introduction=
Negation is the process of turning affirmative statements into the opposite form. For example, the negative equivalent of affirmative sentence, ''I am eating'' is ''I am not eating''. In English there are a few processes at work. ''not'' must always come with an auxiliary verb like the verb 'to have' and 'to be'. In Mi'gmaq, with its extremely detailed and expansive verb conjugations in the present, it is not surprising that the negated conjugation of verbs is just as detailed and expansive as they are in the affirmative.

To start off any commentary on negation, it seems fitting to start of with the word "no" which is ''moqwa'' in Mi'gmaq. (The opposite of this is ''e'e'' , meaning "yes".) Negation in Mi'gmaq is similar to that of Obijwe in that there is both an affix that occurs between the verb and the person marker and a word that comes before the verb denoting negation. See [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ojibwe_grammar#Verbs Verb Conjugation in Ojibwe]. The Mi'gmaq negated affix is ''w'' or ''u'' which is very closely related to the Proto-Algonquian form for negation which is is ''*-w'' ( [http://kuscholarworks.ku.edu/dspace/bitstream/1808/440/1/ling.wp.v15.n2.paper6.pdf Proulx, 1990] ). ''w'' or ''u'' are very closely related phonetically since ''w'' is the semivowel corresponding to the vowel ''u''. Bear in mind that during the elicitation sessions, sometimes it was unsure whether to use ''w'' or ''u''.

Negation in Mi'gmaq consists of adding ''mu'' or ''ma'' then the verb conjugated in the negated verb form. After ''mu'' or ''ma'' the verb must always contain a negative particle. We must think of these two things as inseparable. ''mu'' always comes before the negative conjugated verb in the present or past, and ''ma'' always comes before future or if the prefix ''gis'' ('can', 'to be able to') is attached to the verb. All other prefixes abide by the rules ''mu'' before present or past and ''ma'' before future. There are other particles that take the negated form of the verb, but it is obvious that these particles express a negated idea.

Please note as well that in some of the studies on Mi'gmaq and Algonquian languages the term 'nonaffirmative' is used to describe the negated form. For consistency in this report, I will use the term 'negated' to indicate the form of the verb which is the opposite of affirmative. 'Nonaffirmative' and 'negated' however refer to the same process of negation.

= Conjugation of the Negated Verb =
I have selected the verb ''mijji'' (to eat). Please note that some resources spell this like ''mijji'' where other spell it ''miji'' ([http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED136614.pdf Micmac Teaching Grammar, 1976]). I have selected the spelling from [http://www.mikmaqonline.org/servlet/dictionaryFrameSet.html?arg0=mijjit&method=searchFromMikmaq the Migmaq talking dictionary]. It is also important to note that the Micmac Teaching Grammar uses an orthography that is different of all other orthographies used with Mi'gmaq. I will indicate which terms they are and give the Listuguj equivalent orthographical manner of writing them.

The simplified formula for the conjugation in the negated form: the base form + ''u'' or ''w'' + person ending ([http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED136614.pdf Micmac Teaching Grammar, 1976])
The base form for intransitive verbs is always the verb in the first person singular. For example I eat is ''mijji''. Now to create the second person singular we add the ending -''n'' denoting second person singular and get the form ''mijjin''. For another type of verb (henceforth referred to as the ''a'' verbs) we take the base form ''amalga-'' and add -''n'' to get ''amalgan'' (you dance) and to get the first person singular we add -''i''. Please note that it has been hypothesized that there are at least eleven different conjugations. We will only be dealing with a couple here. Because of reasons of time limitation, I was not able to elicit all eleven types but when there is a difference in conjugation, that will be noted. Note that in the plural the ''u'' or ''w'' comes after ''-ulti-''. This could be due the the fact that ''-ulti-'' is the plural affix that attaches to the base form of the verb and does not convey anything about the tense of the verb, rather it is used to denote that the verb is plural. Thus the ''u'' or ''w'' comes right before the tense marker which is always at the end of the verb. For the first person singular in present there is a null tense marker at the end of some verbs (for example the ''-i'' verbs) thus the negative marker is at the end.

== Present Tense ==
First is a comparison of the affirmative and negated paradigms of the verb ''mijji'' ('eat').

{| class="wikitable"
|+ mijji- 'eat'
|-
! scope="col" colspan="2"| ↓person / number→
! scope="col" | SG
! scope="col" | DU
! scope="col" | PL
|-
! scope="row" rowspan="2"| 1
! scope="row"| 13
| rowspan="2" | mijji
|mijjieg
|mijjultieg
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| mijji'gw
| mijjulti'gw
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2" | 2
| mijjin
| mijjioq
| mijjultioq
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2"| 3
| mijjit
| mijjijig
| mijjultijig
|-
|}

{| class="wikitable"
|+ mu mijji- 'not eat'
|-
! scope="col" colspan="2"| ↓person / number→
! scope="col" | SG
! scope="col" | DU
! scope="col" | PL
|-
! scope="row" rowspan="2"| 1
! scope="row"| 13
| rowspan="2" | mu mijjiw
| mu mijjiweg
| mu mijjultiweg
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| mu mijjigw
| mu mijjultigw
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2" | 2
| mu mijjiun
| mu mijjiwoq
| mu mijjultiwoq
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2"| 3
| mu mijjigw
| mu mijji'gw
| mu mijjulti'gw
|-
|}

The word ''mu'' signifies negation. When ''mu'' is in front of the verb, the verb must also be conjugated in the negative form. In the above table we see the intrusion of the sound ''u'', ''ew'' or ''w''. The following table illustrates the endings for the present negative tense, keeping in mind ''mu'' must ALWAYS come right before the negated verb. When ''mu'' precedes a verb it must ALWAYS be in the negated form.

Below is a table that summarizes the VAI -i stem negative person endings in present conjugation. Inanimate [IN] conjugation was taken from the Micmac Grammar (1976, pg 155).

{| class="wikitable"
|+ VAI -i stem negative present person endings
|-
! scope="col" colspan="2"| ↓person / number→
! scope="col" | SG
! scope="col" | DU
! scope="col" | PL
|-
! scope="row" rowspan="2"| 1
! scope="row"| 13
| rowspan="2" |-u
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2" | 2
| -
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2"| 3.AN
| -
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2"| 3.IN
| -
| -
| -
|-
|}

The forms for the first person dual and plural in the exclusive and inclusive forms are the same. As shown by other data, the dual form seems to be in the process of disappearing. This is one such example where the dual form does not exist for the plural first person. Some younger speakers do not use the dual form at all so it is not surprising that we find a gap in the dual form here. All this is according to the speaker but if we followed the pattern of the previous forms we would expect the dual form for the inclusive and exclusive first person to be ''-ieweg''. "When the verb is negated, then the -g third person is ALWAYS found" (Micmac Grammar, 1976 pg 93).

Below is a comparison of different verbs to give an idea of how to conjugate different types of verbs in the negated form. All forms are conjugated in the present singular third person animate. The form of -''elie-'' was taken from Micmac Grammar (pg 155). For more detail about these forms see [[VAI]].

{| class="wikitable"
! VAI stem || Base Form || Gloss || Affirmative || Gloss || Negated || Gloss
|-
| -i
| mijji-
| eat
| mijjit
| s/he eats
| mu mijjigw
| s/he does not eat
|-
| -a
| amalga-
| dance
| amalgat
| s/he dances
| mu amalgagw
| s/he does not dance
|-
| -a'si
| ala'si-
| go around
| ala'sit
| s/he goes around
| mu ala'sigw
| s/he does not go around
|-
| -e
| elie-
| go
| eliet
| s/he goes
| mu eliegw
| s/he does not go
|-
|}

For verb conjugations in the affirmative please see [http://firstnationhelp.com/ali/posters/pdf/verb_conjugation.pdf Mi'kmaq Verb Conjugation]. As you can see, this site uses the verb ''mijisi'' meaning 'to eat'. In Listuguj this is not used as the word for to eat because it sounds too close for the verb ''mejisi'' 'to excrete'.

=== Transitive ===
Below is the conjugation in present of a transitive verb that takes an inanimate object.

{| class="wikitable" style="text-align:center"
|+ VTI Conjugation Class 1: -m class
|-
! scope="col" | ↓subject / object→
! scope="col" | 0SG
! scope="col" | 0PL
|-
! scope="row" | 1
| malqutm
| malqutmann
|-
! scope="row" | 13
| malqutmeg
| malqutmegl
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| malqutmu'g
| malqutmu'gul
|-
! scope="row" | 2
| malqutmn
| malqutmnn
|-
! scope="row" | 2PL
| malqutmoq
| malqutmoqol
|-
! scope="row" | 3
| malqutmeg
| malqutmegl
|-
! scope="row" | 3PL
| malqutmi'tij
| malqutmi'titl
|}

{| class="wikitable" style="text-align:center"
|+ VTI Negative Conjugation Class 1: -m class
|-
! scope="col" | ↓subject / object→
! scope="col" | 0SG
! scope="col" | 0PL
|-
! scope="row" | 1
| mu malqutmu
| mu malqutmuann
|-
! scope="row" | 13
| mu malqutmueg
| mu malqutmuegl
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| mu malqutmugg
| mu malqutmuggul
|-
! scope="row" | 2
| mu malqutmu'n
| mu malqutmu'nn
|-
! scope="row" | 2PL
| mu malqutmuoq
| mu malqutmuoqol
|-
! scope="row" | 3
| mu malqutmug
| mu malqutmugul
|-
! scope="row" | 3PL
| mu malqutmi'tigw
| mu malqutmi'tigul
|-
|}

{| class="wikitable" style="text-align:center"
|+ VTI Negative Conjugation Class 1: -m class
|-
! scope="col" | ↓subject / object→
! scope="col" | 0SG
! scope="col" | 0PL
|-
! scope="row" | 1
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 13
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 12
|
|
|-
! scope="row" | 2
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 2PL
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 3
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 3PL
| -
| -
|-
|}

== Imperative ==
Here is the formation of the affirmative imperative:
{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijji-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 2 Second person
| mijji
| mijjigw
| mijjultigw
|-
|}

Now we compare it to the negated:
{| class="wikitable"
! ''mutt mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 2 Second person
| mutt mijjiw
| mutt mijjinew
| mutt mijjultinew
|-
|}

== Past Tense ==
Again for the past we compare the past and the negated past.

{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| mijjiap
| mijjieg'p
| mijjultieg'p
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| mijji'gup
| mijjulti'gup
|-
| 2 Second person
| mijjit'p
| mijjioqop
| mijjultioqop
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| mijjip
| mijjipni'g
| mijjultipni'g
|}

Now let us look at the negated forms.

{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| mu mijjiwap
| mu mijjiweg'p
| mu mijjultiweg'p
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| mu mijjiwgup
| mu mijjultiwgup/mijjultiggup
|-
| 2 Second person
| mu mijjiwt'p
| mu mijjiwoqop
| mu mijjultiwoqop
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| mu mijjigup
| mu mijjigupnig
| mu mijjultigupnig
|}

Thus this would be the conjugation of the negated form:

{| class="wikitable"
! Negated Past||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| -
| -
| -
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| -
| -
|-
| 2 Second person
| -
| -
| -
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| -
|
|
|}

For the third person the -''ug'p'' can change to -''weg'p'' for example:

<gl>
\gll Mu ala'ti-we-g'p
not go-NEG-SG.PAST
\trans She didn't go
</gl>

== Future Tense ==
First let us compare the affirmative tense for eat:

{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| mijjit's/mijjia's(List)
| mijjitesnen
| mijjultitesnen
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| mijjitesnu
| mijjultitesnu
|-
| 2 Second person
| mijjit'sg
| mijjitoqs'p
| mijjultitoqs'p
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| mijjitew
| mijjitaq
| mijjultitaq
|}
I was not able to elicit dual forms.

We compare the future affirmative with the negated below:

{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| ma mijjiew
| ma mijjiug
| ma mijjiug
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| ma mijjiug
| ma mijjiug
|-
| 2 Second person
| ma mijjiwn
| ?
| ?
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| ma mijjiewg
| ''n/a''
| ma mijjultiewoq
|}
NOTE: In the future the ''mu'' changes to ''ma'' !! Like ''mu'', ''ma'' must always come before the verb conjugated in the negative future.
The correspondent was not able to produce a dual form in the future.

Now here is a paradigm of the negated endings in the future.

{| class="wikitable"
! Negated Future||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| -ew
| -ug
| -ug
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| -ug
| -ug
|-
| 2 Second person
| -iwn
| ?
| ?
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| -ewg
| ''n/a''
| -ultiwoq
|}

As you may have noticed the future tense is easy! The verbs take the same endings as the negated present tense but the ''mu'' is replaced with ''ma'' thus indicating future.

== When negation is used ==

When the verb is negated there must always find a negative particle (like ''mu'' or ''ma''). If not the sentence is ungrammatical as shown below:

<gl>
\gll *gis-wissugwatige-w
can-cook.1-NEG
\trans I cannot cook (intended meaning)
</gl>

The only form of the above sentence must be:

<gl>
\gll ma gis-wissugwatige-w
NEG can-cook.1-NEG
\trans I cannot cook
</gl>

Thus it is seen that ''ma'' comes before the verb, now making the sentence grammatical.

''ma'' always precedes the future tense AND when the ''gis'' prefix is attached to the verb conjugated in the present for example:

<gl>
\gll ma gis-amalga-w-g
NEG can-dance-NEG-3
\trans s/he cannot dance
</gl>

There are some expressions that always take the negative form of the verb such as ''me menga'' (not yet) and ''mowen'' (nobody) that take the negative form of the verb: (examples from [http://www.mikmaqonline.org/ Mi'gmaq Online Dictionary])

<gl>
\gll me menag newt ajetten-u-g
NEG yet one time-NEG-3
\trans it is not one o’clock yet
</gl>

<gl>
\gll mo-wen mijie-w-g
NEG-who eat-NEG-3
\trans no one is eating
</gl>

<gl>
\gll moqwa' goqwei eign-u-g
no thing be-NEG-3
\trans there is nothing there
</gl>

Below is a list of common particles after which the negated form is used. This list is not complete but these are the most common forms.

{| class="wikitable"
! Particle || When used || Translation
|-
| ''mu''
| before negated present and past
| not
|-
| ''mutt''
| before negated imperative
| do not
|-
| ''lpa mu''
| before negated present and past
| not even
|-
| ''mowen''
| before negated present, past and future
| no one/nobody
|-
| ''moqwa' goqwei'''
| before negated present, past and future
| nothing
|-
| ''me menag''
| before negated verb
| not yet
|-
| ''ma''
| before negated future verb and preverb ''gis'' (can)
| not
|-
|}

''moqwa' goqwei'' is also spelled ''mu goqwei'' and a variant of this is ''mu'' + negated verb + ''goqwei'' when used in object position. It is inanimate. As in the following example:

<gl>
\gll mu malqutem-u goqwei
NEG eat.1>0-NEG what
\trans I eat nothing
</gl>

== Negative Concord ==
As can be seen above, Mi'gmaq is a negative concord language. Negative concord is where "double or multiple negative[s] [do] not express an affirmative but a negative" (van der Wouden & Zwarts, 1992). This is similar to French ''Je n'ai vue personne'' 'I have seen nobody' where both the ''ne'' and ''personne'' are both negative but the resulting sentence is negative, rather than each cancelling the other out resulting in a affirmative sentence, i.e. 'I have seen someone'. Mi'gmaq has negation marked in two places with both negative particles, i.e. ''mu'' & ''ma'', and a negative conjugation of the verb, i.e. with ''-u'' or ''-w'' added. Compare examples <glr id="1"/> and <glr id="2"/>.

<gl id="1">
\gll lpa'tuj eigu-p
boy be.there.PST-SG
\trans the boy was there
</gl>

<gl id="2">
\gll lpa'tuj mu eimu-g-u-p
boy NEG be.there-PST-NEG-SG
\trans the boy was not there
</gl>

= Word Order =
The negative particle (or possibly affix) ''mu'' always appears before the verb it negates. Although words can intervene between ''mu'' and the verb it negates, ''mu'' must always precede the verb.

<gl>
\gll Mali mu amal-gag-u-p
Mali NEG dance-PAST-NEG-SG
\trans Mali did not dance
</gl>

<gl>
\gll mu Mali amal-gag-u-p
NEG Mali dance-PAST-NEG-SG
\trans Mali did not dance
</gl>

Placement of ''mu'' post-verbally results in ungrammaticality, as illustrated below.

<gl>
\gll lpa'tuj mu eimug-u-p
boy NEG be.there.PST-NEG-SG
\trans the boy was not there
</gl>

Acceptable word orders:
*mu eimugup lpa'tuj
*mu lpa'tuj eimugup

Unacceptable word orders:
* *eimugup lpa'tuj mu
* *eimugup mu lpa'tuj
* *lpa'tuj eimugup mu

Furthermore, with regards to word order, it appears that negation must come right before the constituent it negates. Here is an example sentence without negation:

<gl>
\gll ula na lpa'tuj ta'n egitgup wigatign
this DEM boy that read.PST book
\trans this is the boy that read the book
</gl>

If we want to negate the first clause, as to say "This is '''not''' the boy that read the book", negation must directly precede 'boy'.

<gl>
\gll ula na mu lpa'tuj ta'n egitgup wigatign
this DEM NEG boy that read.PST book
\trans this is not the boy that read the book
</gl>

The following word orders for negation in the first clause are impossible:
* *ula na lpa'tuj mu...
* *ula mu na lpa'tuj...
* *mu ula na lpa'tuj...

If we want to negate the second clause, as to say "This is the boy that did '''not''' read the book", the word order may be varied, as long as negation comes before the verb (as discussed previously).

== Scope of Negation ==
As stated above, ''mu'' always comes before the verb. There may be particles that intrude between ''mu'' and the negated verb, but as long as ''mu'' comes before the negated verb, the structure is grammatical. [http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED136614.pdf Micmac Grammar, 1976] Sometimes the meaning of the sentence can change depending on the position of ''mu''.

<gl>
\gll egjitm Mali mu amal-gag-u-p
possible Mali NEG dance-PST-NEG-SG
\trans it is true that Mali did not dance
</gl>

<gl>
\gll mu egjitm Mali amal-gag-u-p
NEG possible Mali dance-PST.NEG.SG
\trans it is not true that Mali danced
</gl>

We would also expect phrases with adverb-like particles translatable as "it is possible" or "it is true" or "it is obvious" would also vary regarding negation.

=Language change and negation=
Often I was not able to elicit both the dual and plural forms of a verb. There are many times when I could only elicit the dual form, or times when the dual and plural forms were the same. It has been noted by our consultants that younger speakers are not using the plural forms but are using the dual form to mean both dual and plural. This seems be a language change happening currently in the speech community where the younger generation is leading the change. As noted in the paradigm above for 'eat' in the negated present tense, both dual and plural forms are the same. Here it seems that the plural form is used for both dual and plural meanings. This would strongly suggest a change happening in the speech community.

=References=
Clark, Jeremiah S. "A Dictionary of the Micmac Language." Rand's Micmac Dictionary. Charlottetown, PEI: The Patriot Publishing Company, 1902. Print.

Delisle, Gill L., and Manny L. Metallic. Micmac Teaching Grammar. Ecowi, QC: Thunderbird Press, 1976. Print.

L'Abbe Maillard, M. Grammaire De La Langue Mikmaque. New York: Presse Cramoisy de Jean-Marie Shea, 1864. Print.

Metallic, Janine. "Mi'gmaq Elicitation Session for Field Methods of Linguistics." Ed. Class, Carol Little and LING415. Montreal, QC: n/a, 2011. Print.

Payne, Thomas Edward. Describing Morphosyntax: a Guide for Field Linguists. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge UP, 2008. Print.

Paul-Martin, Patsy. "Mi'kmaq Verb Conjugation." Ed. Orthography, Mi'kmaq Talking Posters Smith/Francis. Truto, NS: Eastern Woodland Print Communications, 2011. Print.

Proulx, Paul. "Proto-Algonquian Verb Inflection." Studies in Native American Languages 15.2 (1990): 100-45. Print.

van der Wouden, Ton, and Frans Zwarts. "Negative Concord." D. Gilbers and S. Looyenga (eds), Language and Cognition 2. Yearbook 1992 Linguistic Theory and Knowledge Representation of the University of Groningen (1992): 317-31. Print.

Negation

2014-08-07T18:56:39Z

Carol: /* Future Tense */

=Introduction=
Negation is the process of turning affirmative statements into the opposite form. For example, the negative equivalent of affirmative sentence, ''I am eating'' is ''I am not eating''. In English there are a few processes at work. ''not'' must always come with an auxiliary verb like the verb 'to have' and 'to be'. In Mi'gmaq, with its extremely detailed and expansive verb conjugations in the present, it is not surprising that the negated conjugation of verbs is just as detailed and expansive as they are in the affirmative.

To start off any commentary on negation, it seems fitting to start of with the word "no" which is ''moqwa'' in Mi'gmaq. (The opposite of this is ''e'e'' , meaning "yes".) Negation in Mi'gmaq is similar to that of Obijwe in that there is both an affix that occurs between the verb and the person marker and a word that comes before the verb denoting negation. See [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ojibwe_grammar#Verbs Verb Conjugation in Ojibwe]. The Mi'gmaq negated affix is ''w'' or ''u'' which is very closely related to the Proto-Algonquian form for negation which is is ''*-w'' ( [http://kuscholarworks.ku.edu/dspace/bitstream/1808/440/1/ling.wp.v15.n2.paper6.pdf Proulx, 1990] ). ''w'' or ''u'' are very closely related phonetically since ''w'' is the semivowel corresponding to the vowel ''u''. Bear in mind that during the elicitation sessions, sometimes it was unsure whether to use ''w'' or ''u''.

Negation in Mi'gmaq consists of adding ''mu'' or ''ma'' then the verb conjugated in the negated verb form. After ''mu'' or ''ma'' the verb must always contain a negative particle. We must think of these two things as inseparable. ''mu'' always comes before the negative conjugated verb in the present or past, and ''ma'' always comes before future or if the prefix ''gis'' ('can', 'to be able to') is attached to the verb. All other prefixes abide by the rules ''mu'' before present or past and ''ma'' before future. There are other particles that take the negated form of the verb, but it is obvious that these particles express a negated idea.

Please note as well that in some of the studies on Mi'gmaq and Algonquian languages the term 'nonaffirmative' is used to describe the negated form. For consistency in this report, I will use the term 'negated' to indicate the form of the verb which is the opposite of affirmative. 'Nonaffirmative' and 'negated' however refer to the same process of negation.

= Conjugation of the Negated Verb =
I have selected the verb ''mijji'' (to eat). Please note that some resources spell this like ''mijji'' where other spell it ''miji'' ([http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED136614.pdf Micmac Teaching Grammar, 1976]). I have selected the spelling from [http://www.mikmaqonline.org/servlet/dictionaryFrameSet.html?arg0=mijjit&method=searchFromMikmaq the Migmaq talking dictionary]. It is also important to note that the Micmac Teaching Grammar uses an orthography that is different of all other orthographies used with Mi'gmaq. I will indicate which terms they are and give the Listuguj equivalent orthographical manner of writing them.

The simplified formula for the conjugation in the negated form: the base form + ''u'' or ''w'' + person ending ([http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED136614.pdf Micmac Teaching Grammar, 1976])
The base form for intransitive verbs is always the verb in the first person singular. For example I eat is ''mijji''. Now to create the second person singular we add the ending -''n'' denoting second person singular and get the form ''mijjin''. For another type of verb (henceforth referred to as the ''a'' verbs) we take the base form ''amalga-'' and add -''n'' to get ''amalgan'' (you dance) and to get the first person singular we add -''i''. Please note that it has been hypothesized that there are at least eleven different conjugations. We will only be dealing with a couple here. Because of reasons of time limitation, I was not able to elicit all eleven types but when there is a difference in conjugation, that will be noted. Note that in the plural the ''u'' or ''w'' comes after ''-ulti-''. This could be due the the fact that ''-ulti-'' is the plural affix that attaches to the base form of the verb and does not convey anything about the tense of the verb, rather it is used to denote that the verb is plural. Thus the ''u'' or ''w'' comes right before the tense marker which is always at the end of the verb. For the first person singular in present there is a null tense marker at the end of some verbs (for example the ''-i'' verbs) thus the negative marker is at the end.

== Present Tense ==
First is a comparison of the affirmative and negated paradigms of the verb ''mijji'' ('eat').

{| class="wikitable"
|+ mijji- 'eat'
|-
! scope="col" colspan="2"| ↓person / number→
! scope="col" | SG
! scope="col" | DU
! scope="col" | PL
|-
! scope="row" rowspan="2"| 1
! scope="row"| 13
| rowspan="2" | mijji
|mijjieg
|mijjultieg
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| mijji'gw
| mijjulti'gw
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2" | 2
| mijjin
| mijjioq
| mijjultioq
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2"| 3
| mijjit
| mijjijig
| mijjultijig
|-
|}

{| class="wikitable"
|+ mu mijji- 'not eat'
|-
! scope="col" colspan="2"| ↓person / number→
! scope="col" | SG
! scope="col" | DU
! scope="col" | PL
|-
! scope="row" rowspan="2"| 1
! scope="row"| 13
| rowspan="2" | mu mijjiw
| mu mijjiweg
| mu mijjultiweg
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| mu mijjigw
| mu mijjultigw
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2" | 2
| mu mijjiun
| mu mijjiwoq
| mu mijjultiwoq
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2"| 3
| mu mijjigw
| mu mijji'gw
| mu mijjulti'gw
|-
|}

The word ''mu'' signifies negation. When ''mu'' is in front of the verb, the verb must also be conjugated in the negative form. In the above table we see the intrusion of the sound ''u'', ''ew'' or ''w''. The following table illustrates the endings for the present negative tense, keeping in mind ''mu'' must ALWAYS come right before the negated verb. When ''mu'' precedes a verb it must ALWAYS be in the negated form.

Below is a table that summarizes the VAI -i stem negative person endings in present conjugation. Inanimate [IN] conjugation was taken from the Micmac Grammar (1976, pg 155).

{| class="wikitable"
|+ VAI -i stem negative present person endings
|-
! scope="col" colspan="2"| ↓person / number→
! scope="col" | SG
! scope="col" | DU
! scope="col" | PL
|-
! scope="row" rowspan="2"| 1
! scope="row"| 13
| rowspan="2" |-u
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2" | 2
| -
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2"| 3.AN
| -
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2"| 3.IN
| -
| -
| -
|-
|}

The forms for the first person dual and plural in the exclusive and inclusive forms are the same. As shown by other data, the dual form seems to be in the process of disappearing. This is one such example where the dual form does not exist for the plural first person. Some younger speakers do not use the dual form at all so it is not surprising that we find a gap in the dual form here. All this is according to the speaker but if we followed the pattern of the previous forms we would expect the dual form for the inclusive and exclusive first person to be ''-ieweg''. "When the verb is negated, then the -g third person is ALWAYS found" (Micmac Grammar, 1976 pg 93).

Below is a comparison of different verbs to give an idea of how to conjugate different types of verbs in the negated form. All forms are conjugated in the present singular third person animate. The form of -''elie-'' was taken from Micmac Grammar (pg 155). For more detail about these forms see [[VAI]].

{| class="wikitable"
! VAI stem || Base Form || Gloss || Affirmative || Gloss || Negated || Gloss
|-
| -i
| mijji-
| eat
| mijjit
| s/he eats
| mu mijjigw
| s/he does not eat
|-
| -a
| amalga-
| dance
| amalgat
| s/he dances
| mu amalgagw
| s/he does not dance
|-
| -a'si
| ala'si-
| go around
| ala'sit
| s/he goes around
| mu ala'sigw
| s/he does not go around
|-
| -e
| elie-
| go
| eliet
| s/he goes
| mu eliegw
| s/he does not go
|-
|}

For verb conjugations in the affirmative please see [http://firstnationhelp.com/ali/posters/pdf/verb_conjugation.pdf Mi'kmaq Verb Conjugation]. As you can see, this site uses the verb ''mijisi'' meaning 'to eat'. In Listuguj this is not used as the word for to eat because it sounds too close for the verb ''mejisi'' 'to excrete'.

=== Transitive ===
Below is the conjugation in present of a transitive verb that takes an inanimate object.

{| class="wikitable" style="text-align:center"
|+ VTI Conjugation Class 1: -m class
|-
! scope="col" | ↓subject / object→
! scope="col" | 0SG
! scope="col" | 0PL
|-
! scope="row" | 1
| malqutm
| malqutmann
|-
! scope="row" | 13
| malqutmeg
| malqutmegl
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| malqutmu'g
| malqutmu'gul
|-
! scope="row" | 2
| malqutmn
| malqutmnn
|-
! scope="row" | 2PL
| malqutmoq
| malqutmoqol
|-
! scope="row" | 3
| malqutmeg
| malqutmegl
|-
! scope="row" | 3PL
| malqutmi'tij
| malqutmi'titl
|}

{| class="wikitable" style="text-align:center"
|+ VTI Negative Conjugation Class 1: -m class
|-
! scope="col" | ↓subject / object→
! scope="col" | 0SG
! scope="col" | 0PL
|-
! scope="row" | 1
| mu malqutmu
| mu malqutmuann
|-
! scope="row" | 13
| mu malqutmueg
| mu malqutmuegl
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| mu malqutmugg
| mu malqutmuggul
|-
! scope="row" | 2
| mu malqutmu'n
| mu malqutmu'nn
|-
! scope="row" | 2PL
| mu malqutmuoq
| mu malqutmuoqol
|-
! scope="row" | 3
| mu malqutmug
| mu malqutmugul
|-
! scope="row" | 3PL
| mu malqutmi'tigw
| mu malqutmi'tigul
|-
|}

{| class="wikitable" style="text-align:center"
|+ VTI Negative Conjugation Class 1: -m class
|-
! scope="col" | ↓subject / object→
! scope="col" | 0SG
! scope="col" | 0PL
|-
! scope="row" | 1
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 13
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 12
|
|
|-
! scope="row" | 2
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 2PL
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 3
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 3PL
| -
| -
|-
|}

== Imperative ==
Here is the formation of the affirmative imperative:
{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijji-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 2 Second person
| mijji
| mijjigw
| mijjultigw
|-
|}

Now we compare it to the negated:
{| class="wikitable"
! ''mutt mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 2 Second person
| mutt mijjiw
| mutt mijjinew
| mutt mijjultinew
|-
|}

== Past Tense ==
Again for the past we compare the past and the negated past.

{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| mijjiap
| mijjieg'p
| mijjultieg'p
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| mijji'gup
| mijjulti'gup
|-
| 2 Second person
| mijjit'p
| mijjioqop
| mijjultioqop
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| mijjip
| mijjipni'g
| mijjultipni'g
|}

Now let us look at the negated forms.

{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| mu mijjiwap
| mu mijjiweg'p
| mu mijjultiweg'p
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| mu mijjiwgup
| mu mijjultiwgup/mijjultiggup
|-
| 2 Second person
| mu mijjiwt'p
| mu mijjiwoqop
| mu mijjultiwoqop
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| mu mijjigup
| mu mijjigupnig
| mu mijjultigupnig
|}

Thus this would be the conjugation of the negated form:

{| class="wikitable"
! Negated Past||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| -
| -
| -
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| -
| -
|-
| 2 Second person
| -
| -
| -
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| -
|
|
|}

For the third person the -''ug'p'' can change to -''weg'p'' for example:

<gl>
\gll Mu ala'ti-we-g'p
not go-NEG-SG.PAST
\trans She didn't go
</gl>

== Future Tense ==
First let us compare the affirmative tense for eat:

{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| mijjit's/mijjia's(List)
| ?
| mijjit'snen
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
|
| mijjit'snu
|-
| 2 Second person
| mijjit'sg
| ?
| mijjitoqs'p
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| mijjitew
| ''n/a''
| mijjultitaq
|}
I was not able to elicit dual forms.

We compare the future affirmative with the negated below:

{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| ma mijjiew
| ma mijjiug
| ma mijjiug
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| ma mijjiug
| ma mijjiug
|-
| 2 Second person
| ma mijjiwn
| ?
| ?
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| ma mijjiewg
| ''n/a''
| ma mijjultiewoq
|}
NOTE: In the future the ''mu'' changes to ''ma'' !! Like ''mu'', ''ma'' must always come before the verb conjugated in the negative future.
The correspondent was not able to produce a dual form in the future.

Now here is a paradigm of the negated endings in the future.

{| class="wikitable"
! Negated Future||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| -ew
| -ug
| -ug
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| -ug
| -ug
|-
| 2 Second person
| -iwn
| ?
| ?
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| -ewg
| ''n/a''
| -ultiwoq
|}

As you may have noticed the future tense is easy! The verbs take the same endings as the negated present tense but the ''mu'' is replaced with ''ma'' thus indicating future.

== When negation is used ==

When the verb is negated there must always find a negative particle (like ''mu'' or ''ma''). If not the sentence is ungrammatical as shown below:

<gl>
\gll *gis-wissugwatige-w
can-cook.1-NEG
\trans I cannot cook (intended meaning)
</gl>

The only form of the above sentence must be:

<gl>
\gll ma gis-wissugwatige-w
NEG can-cook.1-NEG
\trans I cannot cook
</gl>

Thus it is seen that ''ma'' comes before the verb, now making the sentence grammatical.

''ma'' always precedes the future tense AND when the ''gis'' prefix is attached to the verb conjugated in the present for example:

<gl>
\gll ma gis-amalga-w-g
NEG can-dance-NEG-3
\trans s/he cannot dance
</gl>

There are some expressions that always take the negative form of the verb such as ''me menga'' (not yet) and ''mowen'' (nobody) that take the negative form of the verb: (examples from [http://www.mikmaqonline.org/ Mi'gmaq Online Dictionary])

<gl>
\gll me menag newt ajetten-u-g
NEG yet one time-NEG-3
\trans it is not one o’clock yet
</gl>

<gl>
\gll mo-wen mijie-w-g
NEG-who eat-NEG-3
\trans no one is eating
</gl>

<gl>
\gll moqwa' goqwei eign-u-g
no thing be-NEG-3
\trans there is nothing there
</gl>

Below is a list of common particles after which the negated form is used. This list is not complete but these are the most common forms.

{| class="wikitable"
! Particle || When used || Translation
|-
| ''mu''
| before negated present and past
| not
|-
| ''mutt''
| before negated imperative
| do not
|-
| ''lpa mu''
| before negated present and past
| not even
|-
| ''mowen''
| before negated present, past and future
| no one/nobody
|-
| ''moqwa' goqwei'''
| before negated present, past and future
| nothing
|-
| ''me menag''
| before negated verb
| not yet
|-
| ''ma''
| before negated future verb and preverb ''gis'' (can)
| not
|-
|}

''moqwa' goqwei'' is also spelled ''mu goqwei'' and a variant of this is ''mu'' + negated verb + ''goqwei'' when used in object position. It is inanimate. As in the following example:

<gl>
\gll mu malqutem-u goqwei
NEG eat.1>0-NEG what
\trans I eat nothing
</gl>

== Negative Concord ==
As can be seen above, Mi'gmaq is a negative concord language. Negative concord is where "double or multiple negative[s] [do] not express an affirmative but a negative" (van der Wouden & Zwarts, 1992). This is similar to French ''Je n'ai vue personne'' 'I have seen nobody' where both the ''ne'' and ''personne'' are both negative but the resulting sentence is negative, rather than each cancelling the other out resulting in a affirmative sentence, i.e. 'I have seen someone'. Mi'gmaq has negation marked in two places with both negative particles, i.e. ''mu'' & ''ma'', and a negative conjugation of the verb, i.e. with ''-u'' or ''-w'' added. Compare examples <glr id="1"/> and <glr id="2"/>.

<gl id="1">
\gll lpa'tuj eigu-p
boy be.there.PST-SG
\trans the boy was there
</gl>

<gl id="2">
\gll lpa'tuj mu eimu-g-u-p
boy NEG be.there-PST-NEG-SG
\trans the boy was not there
</gl>

= Word Order =
The negative particle (or possibly affix) ''mu'' always appears before the verb it negates. Although words can intervene between ''mu'' and the verb it negates, ''mu'' must always precede the verb.

<gl>
\gll Mali mu amal-gag-u-p
Mali NEG dance-PAST-NEG-SG
\trans Mali did not dance
</gl>

<gl>
\gll mu Mali amal-gag-u-p
NEG Mali dance-PAST-NEG-SG
\trans Mali did not dance
</gl>

Placement of ''mu'' post-verbally results in ungrammaticality, as illustrated below.

<gl>
\gll lpa'tuj mu eimug-u-p
boy NEG be.there.PST-NEG-SG
\trans the boy was not there
</gl>

Acceptable word orders:
*mu eimugup lpa'tuj
*mu lpa'tuj eimugup

Unacceptable word orders:
* *eimugup lpa'tuj mu
* *eimugup mu lpa'tuj
* *lpa'tuj eimugup mu

Furthermore, with regards to word order, it appears that negation must come right before the constituent it negates. Here is an example sentence without negation:

<gl>
\gll ula na lpa'tuj ta'n egitgup wigatign
this DEM boy that read.PST book
\trans this is the boy that read the book
</gl>

If we want to negate the first clause, as to say "This is '''not''' the boy that read the book", negation must directly precede 'boy'.

<gl>
\gll ula na mu lpa'tuj ta'n egitgup wigatign
this DEM NEG boy that read.PST book
\trans this is not the boy that read the book
</gl>

The following word orders for negation in the first clause are impossible:
* *ula na lpa'tuj mu...
* *ula mu na lpa'tuj...
* *mu ula na lpa'tuj...

If we want to negate the second clause, as to say "This is the boy that did '''not''' read the book", the word order may be varied, as long as negation comes before the verb (as discussed previously).

== Scope of Negation ==
As stated above, ''mu'' always comes before the verb. There may be particles that intrude between ''mu'' and the negated verb, but as long as ''mu'' comes before the negated verb, the structure is grammatical. [http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED136614.pdf Micmac Grammar, 1976] Sometimes the meaning of the sentence can change depending on the position of ''mu''.

<gl>
\gll egjitm Mali mu amal-gag-u-p
possible Mali NEG dance-PST-NEG-SG
\trans it is true that Mali did not dance
</gl>

<gl>
\gll mu egjitm Mali amal-gag-u-p
NEG possible Mali dance-PST.NEG.SG
\trans it is not true that Mali danced
</gl>

We would also expect phrases with adverb-like particles translatable as "it is possible" or "it is true" or "it is obvious" would also vary regarding negation.

=Language change and negation=
Often I was not able to elicit both the dual and plural forms of a verb. There are many times when I could only elicit the dual form, or times when the dual and plural forms were the same. It has been noted by our consultants that younger speakers are not using the plural forms but are using the dual form to mean both dual and plural. This seems be a language change happening currently in the speech community where the younger generation is leading the change. As noted in the paradigm above for 'eat' in the negated present tense, both dual and plural forms are the same. Here it seems that the plural form is used for both dual and plural meanings. This would strongly suggest a change happening in the speech community.

=References=
Clark, Jeremiah S. "A Dictionary of the Micmac Language." Rand's Micmac Dictionary. Charlottetown, PEI: The Patriot Publishing Company, 1902. Print.

Delisle, Gill L., and Manny L. Metallic. Micmac Teaching Grammar. Ecowi, QC: Thunderbird Press, 1976. Print.

L'Abbe Maillard, M. Grammaire De La Langue Mikmaque. New York: Presse Cramoisy de Jean-Marie Shea, 1864. Print.

Metallic, Janine. "Mi'gmaq Elicitation Session for Field Methods of Linguistics." Ed. Class, Carol Little and LING415. Montreal, QC: n/a, 2011. Print.

Payne, Thomas Edward. Describing Morphosyntax: a Guide for Field Linguists. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge UP, 2008. Print.

Paul-Martin, Patsy. "Mi'kmaq Verb Conjugation." Ed. Orthography, Mi'kmaq Talking Posters Smith/Francis. Truto, NS: Eastern Woodland Print Communications, 2011. Print.

Proulx, Paul. "Proto-Algonquian Verb Inflection." Studies in Native American Languages 15.2 (1990): 100-45. Print.

van der Wouden, Ton, and Frans Zwarts. "Negative Concord." D. Gilbers and S. Looyenga (eds), Language and Cognition 2. Yearbook 1992 Linguistic Theory and Knowledge Representation of the University of Groningen (1992): 317-31. Print.

Negation

2014-08-07T18:54:25Z

Carol: /* Past Tense */

=Introduction=
Negation is the process of turning affirmative statements into the opposite form. For example, the negative equivalent of affirmative sentence, ''I am eating'' is ''I am not eating''. In English there are a few processes at work. ''not'' must always come with an auxiliary verb like the verb 'to have' and 'to be'. In Mi'gmaq, with its extremely detailed and expansive verb conjugations in the present, it is not surprising that the negated conjugation of verbs is just as detailed and expansive as they are in the affirmative.

To start off any commentary on negation, it seems fitting to start of with the word "no" which is ''moqwa'' in Mi'gmaq. (The opposite of this is ''e'e'' , meaning "yes".) Negation in Mi'gmaq is similar to that of Obijwe in that there is both an affix that occurs between the verb and the person marker and a word that comes before the verb denoting negation. See [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ojibwe_grammar#Verbs Verb Conjugation in Ojibwe]. The Mi'gmaq negated affix is ''w'' or ''u'' which is very closely related to the Proto-Algonquian form for negation which is is ''*-w'' ( [http://kuscholarworks.ku.edu/dspace/bitstream/1808/440/1/ling.wp.v15.n2.paper6.pdf Proulx, 1990] ). ''w'' or ''u'' are very closely related phonetically since ''w'' is the semivowel corresponding to the vowel ''u''. Bear in mind that during the elicitation sessions, sometimes it was unsure whether to use ''w'' or ''u''.

Negation in Mi'gmaq consists of adding ''mu'' or ''ma'' then the verb conjugated in the negated verb form. After ''mu'' or ''ma'' the verb must always contain a negative particle. We must think of these two things as inseparable. ''mu'' always comes before the negative conjugated verb in the present or past, and ''ma'' always comes before future or if the prefix ''gis'' ('can', 'to be able to') is attached to the verb. All other prefixes abide by the rules ''mu'' before present or past and ''ma'' before future. There are other particles that take the negated form of the verb, but it is obvious that these particles express a negated idea.

Please note as well that in some of the studies on Mi'gmaq and Algonquian languages the term 'nonaffirmative' is used to describe the negated form. For consistency in this report, I will use the term 'negated' to indicate the form of the verb which is the opposite of affirmative. 'Nonaffirmative' and 'negated' however refer to the same process of negation.

= Conjugation of the Negated Verb =
I have selected the verb ''mijji'' (to eat). Please note that some resources spell this like ''mijji'' where other spell it ''miji'' ([http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED136614.pdf Micmac Teaching Grammar, 1976]). I have selected the spelling from [http://www.mikmaqonline.org/servlet/dictionaryFrameSet.html?arg0=mijjit&method=searchFromMikmaq the Migmaq talking dictionary]. It is also important to note that the Micmac Teaching Grammar uses an orthography that is different of all other orthographies used with Mi'gmaq. I will indicate which terms they are and give the Listuguj equivalent orthographical manner of writing them.

The simplified formula for the conjugation in the negated form: the base form + ''u'' or ''w'' + person ending ([http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED136614.pdf Micmac Teaching Grammar, 1976])
The base form for intransitive verbs is always the verb in the first person singular. For example I eat is ''mijji''. Now to create the second person singular we add the ending -''n'' denoting second person singular and get the form ''mijjin''. For another type of verb (henceforth referred to as the ''a'' verbs) we take the base form ''amalga-'' and add -''n'' to get ''amalgan'' (you dance) and to get the first person singular we add -''i''. Please note that it has been hypothesized that there are at least eleven different conjugations. We will only be dealing with a couple here. Because of reasons of time limitation, I was not able to elicit all eleven types but when there is a difference in conjugation, that will be noted. Note that in the plural the ''u'' or ''w'' comes after ''-ulti-''. This could be due the the fact that ''-ulti-'' is the plural affix that attaches to the base form of the verb and does not convey anything about the tense of the verb, rather it is used to denote that the verb is plural. Thus the ''u'' or ''w'' comes right before the tense marker which is always at the end of the verb. For the first person singular in present there is a null tense marker at the end of some verbs (for example the ''-i'' verbs) thus the negative marker is at the end.

== Present Tense ==
First is a comparison of the affirmative and negated paradigms of the verb ''mijji'' ('eat').

{| class="wikitable"
|+ mijji- 'eat'
|-
! scope="col" colspan="2"| ↓person / number→
! scope="col" | SG
! scope="col" | DU
! scope="col" | PL
|-
! scope="row" rowspan="2"| 1
! scope="row"| 13
| rowspan="2" | mijji
|mijjieg
|mijjultieg
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| mijji'gw
| mijjulti'gw
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2" | 2
| mijjin
| mijjioq
| mijjultioq
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2"| 3
| mijjit
| mijjijig
| mijjultijig
|-
|}

{| class="wikitable"
|+ mu mijji- 'not eat'
|-
! scope="col" colspan="2"| ↓person / number→
! scope="col" | SG
! scope="col" | DU
! scope="col" | PL
|-
! scope="row" rowspan="2"| 1
! scope="row"| 13
| rowspan="2" | mu mijjiw
| mu mijjiweg
| mu mijjultiweg
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| mu mijjigw
| mu mijjultigw
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2" | 2
| mu mijjiun
| mu mijjiwoq
| mu mijjultiwoq
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2"| 3
| mu mijjigw
| mu mijji'gw
| mu mijjulti'gw
|-
|}

The word ''mu'' signifies negation. When ''mu'' is in front of the verb, the verb must also be conjugated in the negative form. In the above table we see the intrusion of the sound ''u'', ''ew'' or ''w''. The following table illustrates the endings for the present negative tense, keeping in mind ''mu'' must ALWAYS come right before the negated verb. When ''mu'' precedes a verb it must ALWAYS be in the negated form.

Below is a table that summarizes the VAI -i stem negative person endings in present conjugation. Inanimate [IN] conjugation was taken from the Micmac Grammar (1976, pg 155).

{| class="wikitable"
|+ VAI -i stem negative present person endings
|-
! scope="col" colspan="2"| ↓person / number→
! scope="col" | SG
! scope="col" | DU
! scope="col" | PL
|-
! scope="row" rowspan="2"| 1
! scope="row"| 13
| rowspan="2" |-u
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2" | 2
| -
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2"| 3.AN
| -
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2"| 3.IN
| -
| -
| -
|-
|}

The forms for the first person dual and plural in the exclusive and inclusive forms are the same. As shown by other data, the dual form seems to be in the process of disappearing. This is one such example where the dual form does not exist for the plural first person. Some younger speakers do not use the dual form at all so it is not surprising that we find a gap in the dual form here. All this is according to the speaker but if we followed the pattern of the previous forms we would expect the dual form for the inclusive and exclusive first person to be ''-ieweg''. "When the verb is negated, then the -g third person is ALWAYS found" (Micmac Grammar, 1976 pg 93).

Below is a comparison of different verbs to give an idea of how to conjugate different types of verbs in the negated form. All forms are conjugated in the present singular third person animate. The form of -''elie-'' was taken from Micmac Grammar (pg 155). For more detail about these forms see [[VAI]].

{| class="wikitable"
! VAI stem || Base Form || Gloss || Affirmative || Gloss || Negated || Gloss
|-
| -i
| mijji-
| eat
| mijjit
| s/he eats
| mu mijjigw
| s/he does not eat
|-
| -a
| amalga-
| dance
| amalgat
| s/he dances
| mu amalgagw
| s/he does not dance
|-
| -a'si
| ala'si-
| go around
| ala'sit
| s/he goes around
| mu ala'sigw
| s/he does not go around
|-
| -e
| elie-
| go
| eliet
| s/he goes
| mu eliegw
| s/he does not go
|-
|}

For verb conjugations in the affirmative please see [http://firstnationhelp.com/ali/posters/pdf/verb_conjugation.pdf Mi'kmaq Verb Conjugation]. As you can see, this site uses the verb ''mijisi'' meaning 'to eat'. In Listuguj this is not used as the word for to eat because it sounds too close for the verb ''mejisi'' 'to excrete'.

=== Transitive ===
Below is the conjugation in present of a transitive verb that takes an inanimate object.

{| class="wikitable" style="text-align:center"
|+ VTI Conjugation Class 1: -m class
|-
! scope="col" | ↓subject / object→
! scope="col" | 0SG
! scope="col" | 0PL
|-
! scope="row" | 1
| malqutm
| malqutmann
|-
! scope="row" | 13
| malqutmeg
| malqutmegl
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| malqutmu'g
| malqutmu'gul
|-
! scope="row" | 2
| malqutmn
| malqutmnn
|-
! scope="row" | 2PL
| malqutmoq
| malqutmoqol
|-
! scope="row" | 3
| malqutmeg
| malqutmegl
|-
! scope="row" | 3PL
| malqutmi'tij
| malqutmi'titl
|}

{| class="wikitable" style="text-align:center"
|+ VTI Negative Conjugation Class 1: -m class
|-
! scope="col" | ↓subject / object→
! scope="col" | 0SG
! scope="col" | 0PL
|-
! scope="row" | 1
| mu malqutmu
| mu malqutmuann
|-
! scope="row" | 13
| mu malqutmueg
| mu malqutmuegl
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| mu malqutmugg
| mu malqutmuggul
|-
! scope="row" | 2
| mu malqutmu'n
| mu malqutmu'nn
|-
! scope="row" | 2PL
| mu malqutmuoq
| mu malqutmuoqol
|-
! scope="row" | 3
| mu malqutmug
| mu malqutmugul
|-
! scope="row" | 3PL
| mu malqutmi'tigw
| mu malqutmi'tigul
|-
|}

{| class="wikitable" style="text-align:center"
|+ VTI Negative Conjugation Class 1: -m class
|-
! scope="col" | ↓subject / object→
! scope="col" | 0SG
! scope="col" | 0PL
|-
! scope="row" | 1
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 13
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 12
|
|
|-
! scope="row" | 2
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 2PL
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 3
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 3PL
| -
| -
|-
|}

== Imperative ==
Here is the formation of the affirmative imperative:
{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijji-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 2 Second person
| mijji
| mijjigw
| mijjultigw
|-
|}

Now we compare it to the negated:
{| class="wikitable"
! ''mutt mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 2 Second person
| mutt mijjiw
| mutt mijjinew
| mutt mijjultinew
|-
|}

== Past Tense ==
Again for the past we compare the past and the negated past.

{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| mijjiap
| mijjieg'p
| mijjultieg'p
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| mijji'gup
| mijjulti'gup
|-
| 2 Second person
| mijjit'p
| mijjioqop
| mijjultioqop
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| mijjip
| mijjipni'g
| mijjultipni'g
|}

Now let us look at the negated forms.

{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| mu mijjiwap
| mu mijjiweg'p
| mu mijjultiweg'p
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| mu mijjiwgup
| mu mijjultiwgup/mijjultiggup
|-
| 2 Second person
| mu mijjiwt'p
| mu mijjiwoqop
| mu mijjultiwoqop
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| mu mijjigup
| mu mijjigupnig
| mu mijjultigupnig
|}

Thus this would be the conjugation of the negated form:

{| class="wikitable"
! Negated Past||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| -
| -
| -
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| -
| -
|-
| 2 Second person
| -
| -
| -
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| -
|
|
|}

For the third person the -''ug'p'' can change to -''weg'p'' for example:

<gl>
\gll Mu ala'ti-we-g'p
not go-NEG-SG.PAST
\trans She didn't go
</gl>

== Future Tense ==
First let us compare the affirmative tense for eat:

{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| mijjias
| ?
| mijjit'snen
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
|
| mijjit'snu
|-
| 2 Second person
| mijjit's(g)
| ?
| mijjitoqs'p
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| mijjitew
| ''n/a''
| mijjultitaq
|}
I was not able to elicit dual forms.

We compare the future affirmative with the negated below:

{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| ma mijjiew
| ma mijjiug
| ma mijjiug
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| ma mijjiug
| ma mijjiug
|-
| 2 Second person
| ma mijjiwn
| ?
| ?
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| ma mijjiewg
| ''n/a''
| ma mijjultiewoq
|}
NOTE: In the future the ''mu'' changes to ''ma'' !! Like ''mu'', ''ma'' must always come before the verb conjugated in the negative future.
The correspondent was not able to produce a dual form in the future.

Now here is a paradigm of the negated endings in the future.

{| class="wikitable"
! Negated Future||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| -ew
| -ug
| -ug
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| -ug
| -ug
|-
| 2 Second person
| -iwn
| ?
| ?
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| -ewg
| ''n/a''
| -ultiwoq
|}

As you may have noticed the future tense is easy! The verbs take the same endings as the negated present tense but the ''mu'' is replaced with ''ma'' thus indicating future.

== When negation is used ==

When the verb is negated there must always find a negative particle (like ''mu'' or ''ma''). If not the sentence is ungrammatical as shown below:

<gl>
\gll *gis-wissugwatige-w
can-cook.1-NEG
\trans I cannot cook (intended meaning)
</gl>

The only form of the above sentence must be:

<gl>
\gll ma gis-wissugwatige-w
NEG can-cook.1-NEG
\trans I cannot cook
</gl>

Thus it is seen that ''ma'' comes before the verb, now making the sentence grammatical.

''ma'' always precedes the future tense AND when the ''gis'' prefix is attached to the verb conjugated in the present for example:

<gl>
\gll ma gis-amalga-w-g
NEG can-dance-NEG-3
\trans s/he cannot dance
</gl>

There are some expressions that always take the negative form of the verb such as ''me menga'' (not yet) and ''mowen'' (nobody) that take the negative form of the verb: (examples from [http://www.mikmaqonline.org/ Mi'gmaq Online Dictionary])

<gl>
\gll me menag newt ajetten-u-g
NEG yet one time-NEG-3
\trans it is not one o’clock yet
</gl>

<gl>
\gll mo-wen mijie-w-g
NEG-who eat-NEG-3
\trans no one is eating
</gl>

<gl>
\gll moqwa' goqwei eign-u-g
no thing be-NEG-3
\trans there is nothing there
</gl>

Below is a list of common particles after which the negated form is used. This list is not complete but these are the most common forms.

{| class="wikitable"
! Particle || When used || Translation
|-
| ''mu''
| before negated present and past
| not
|-
| ''mutt''
| before negated imperative
| do not
|-
| ''lpa mu''
| before negated present and past
| not even
|-
| ''mowen''
| before negated present, past and future
| no one/nobody
|-
| ''moqwa' goqwei'''
| before negated present, past and future
| nothing
|-
| ''me menag''
| before negated verb
| not yet
|-
| ''ma''
| before negated future verb and preverb ''gis'' (can)
| not
|-
|}

''moqwa' goqwei'' is also spelled ''mu goqwei'' and a variant of this is ''mu'' + negated verb + ''goqwei'' when used in object position. It is inanimate. As in the following example:

<gl>
\gll mu malqutem-u goqwei
NEG eat.1>0-NEG what
\trans I eat nothing
</gl>

== Negative Concord ==
As can be seen above, Mi'gmaq is a negative concord language. Negative concord is where "double or multiple negative[s] [do] not express an affirmative but a negative" (van der Wouden & Zwarts, 1992). This is similar to French ''Je n'ai vue personne'' 'I have seen nobody' where both the ''ne'' and ''personne'' are both negative but the resulting sentence is negative, rather than each cancelling the other out resulting in a affirmative sentence, i.e. 'I have seen someone'. Mi'gmaq has negation marked in two places with both negative particles, i.e. ''mu'' & ''ma'', and a negative conjugation of the verb, i.e. with ''-u'' or ''-w'' added. Compare examples <glr id="1"/> and <glr id="2"/>.

<gl id="1">
\gll lpa'tuj eigu-p
boy be.there.PST-SG
\trans the boy was there
</gl>

<gl id="2">
\gll lpa'tuj mu eimu-g-u-p
boy NEG be.there-PST-NEG-SG
\trans the boy was not there
</gl>

= Word Order =
The negative particle (or possibly affix) ''mu'' always appears before the verb it negates. Although words can intervene between ''mu'' and the verb it negates, ''mu'' must always precede the verb.

<gl>
\gll Mali mu amal-gag-u-p
Mali NEG dance-PAST-NEG-SG
\trans Mali did not dance
</gl>

<gl>
\gll mu Mali amal-gag-u-p
NEG Mali dance-PAST-NEG-SG
\trans Mali did not dance
</gl>

Placement of ''mu'' post-verbally results in ungrammaticality, as illustrated below.

<gl>
\gll lpa'tuj mu eimug-u-p
boy NEG be.there.PST-NEG-SG
\trans the boy was not there
</gl>

Acceptable word orders:
*mu eimugup lpa'tuj
*mu lpa'tuj eimugup

Unacceptable word orders:
* *eimugup lpa'tuj mu
* *eimugup mu lpa'tuj
* *lpa'tuj eimugup mu

Furthermore, with regards to word order, it appears that negation must come right before the constituent it negates. Here is an example sentence without negation:

<gl>
\gll ula na lpa'tuj ta'n egitgup wigatign
this DEM boy that read.PST book
\trans this is the boy that read the book
</gl>

If we want to negate the first clause, as to say "This is '''not''' the boy that read the book", negation must directly precede 'boy'.

<gl>
\gll ula na mu lpa'tuj ta'n egitgup wigatign
this DEM NEG boy that read.PST book
\trans this is not the boy that read the book
</gl>

The following word orders for negation in the first clause are impossible:
* *ula na lpa'tuj mu...
* *ula mu na lpa'tuj...
* *mu ula na lpa'tuj...

If we want to negate the second clause, as to say "This is the boy that did '''not''' read the book", the word order may be varied, as long as negation comes before the verb (as discussed previously).

== Scope of Negation ==
As stated above, ''mu'' always comes before the verb. There may be particles that intrude between ''mu'' and the negated verb, but as long as ''mu'' comes before the negated verb, the structure is grammatical. [http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED136614.pdf Micmac Grammar, 1976] Sometimes the meaning of the sentence can change depending on the position of ''mu''.

<gl>
\gll egjitm Mali mu amal-gag-u-p
possible Mali NEG dance-PST-NEG-SG
\trans it is true that Mali did not dance
</gl>

<gl>
\gll mu egjitm Mali amal-gag-u-p
NEG possible Mali dance-PST.NEG.SG
\trans it is not true that Mali danced
</gl>

We would also expect phrases with adverb-like particles translatable as "it is possible" or "it is true" or "it is obvious" would also vary regarding negation.

=Language change and negation=
Often I was not able to elicit both the dual and plural forms of a verb. There are many times when I could only elicit the dual form, or times when the dual and plural forms were the same. It has been noted by our consultants that younger speakers are not using the plural forms but are using the dual form to mean both dual and plural. This seems be a language change happening currently in the speech community where the younger generation is leading the change. As noted in the paradigm above for 'eat' in the negated present tense, both dual and plural forms are the same. Here it seems that the plural form is used for both dual and plural meanings. This would strongly suggest a change happening in the speech community.

=References=
Clark, Jeremiah S. "A Dictionary of the Micmac Language." Rand's Micmac Dictionary. Charlottetown, PEI: The Patriot Publishing Company, 1902. Print.

Delisle, Gill L., and Manny L. Metallic. Micmac Teaching Grammar. Ecowi, QC: Thunderbird Press, 1976. Print.

L'Abbe Maillard, M. Grammaire De La Langue Mikmaque. New York: Presse Cramoisy de Jean-Marie Shea, 1864. Print.

Metallic, Janine. "Mi'gmaq Elicitation Session for Field Methods of Linguistics." Ed. Class, Carol Little and LING415. Montreal, QC: n/a, 2011. Print.

Payne, Thomas Edward. Describing Morphosyntax: a Guide for Field Linguists. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge UP, 2008. Print.

Paul-Martin, Patsy. "Mi'kmaq Verb Conjugation." Ed. Orthography, Mi'kmaq Talking Posters Smith/Francis. Truto, NS: Eastern Woodland Print Communications, 2011. Print.

Proulx, Paul. "Proto-Algonquian Verb Inflection." Studies in Native American Languages 15.2 (1990): 100-45. Print.

van der Wouden, Ton, and Frans Zwarts. "Negative Concord." D. Gilbers and S. Looyenga (eds), Language and Cognition 2. Yearbook 1992 Linguistic Theory and Knowledge Representation of the University of Groningen (1992): 317-31. Print.

Negation

2014-08-07T18:53:58Z

Carol: /* Past Tense */

=Introduction=
Negation is the process of turning affirmative statements into the opposite form. For example, the negative equivalent of affirmative sentence, ''I am eating'' is ''I am not eating''. In English there are a few processes at work. ''not'' must always come with an auxiliary verb like the verb 'to have' and 'to be'. In Mi'gmaq, with its extremely detailed and expansive verb conjugations in the present, it is not surprising that the negated conjugation of verbs is just as detailed and expansive as they are in the affirmative.

To start off any commentary on negation, it seems fitting to start of with the word "no" which is ''moqwa'' in Mi'gmaq. (The opposite of this is ''e'e'' , meaning "yes".) Negation in Mi'gmaq is similar to that of Obijwe in that there is both an affix that occurs between the verb and the person marker and a word that comes before the verb denoting negation. See [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ojibwe_grammar#Verbs Verb Conjugation in Ojibwe]. The Mi'gmaq negated affix is ''w'' or ''u'' which is very closely related to the Proto-Algonquian form for negation which is is ''*-w'' ( [http://kuscholarworks.ku.edu/dspace/bitstream/1808/440/1/ling.wp.v15.n2.paper6.pdf Proulx, 1990] ). ''w'' or ''u'' are very closely related phonetically since ''w'' is the semivowel corresponding to the vowel ''u''. Bear in mind that during the elicitation sessions, sometimes it was unsure whether to use ''w'' or ''u''.

Negation in Mi'gmaq consists of adding ''mu'' or ''ma'' then the verb conjugated in the negated verb form. After ''mu'' or ''ma'' the verb must always contain a negative particle. We must think of these two things as inseparable. ''mu'' always comes before the negative conjugated verb in the present or past, and ''ma'' always comes before future or if the prefix ''gis'' ('can', 'to be able to') is attached to the verb. All other prefixes abide by the rules ''mu'' before present or past and ''ma'' before future. There are other particles that take the negated form of the verb, but it is obvious that these particles express a negated idea.

Please note as well that in some of the studies on Mi'gmaq and Algonquian languages the term 'nonaffirmative' is used to describe the negated form. For consistency in this report, I will use the term 'negated' to indicate the form of the verb which is the opposite of affirmative. 'Nonaffirmative' and 'negated' however refer to the same process of negation.

= Conjugation of the Negated Verb =
I have selected the verb ''mijji'' (to eat). Please note that some resources spell this like ''mijji'' where other spell it ''miji'' ([http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED136614.pdf Micmac Teaching Grammar, 1976]). I have selected the spelling from [http://www.mikmaqonline.org/servlet/dictionaryFrameSet.html?arg0=mijjit&method=searchFromMikmaq the Migmaq talking dictionary]. It is also important to note that the Micmac Teaching Grammar uses an orthography that is different of all other orthographies used with Mi'gmaq. I will indicate which terms they are and give the Listuguj equivalent orthographical manner of writing them.

The simplified formula for the conjugation in the negated form: the base form + ''u'' or ''w'' + person ending ([http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED136614.pdf Micmac Teaching Grammar, 1976])
The base form for intransitive verbs is always the verb in the first person singular. For example I eat is ''mijji''. Now to create the second person singular we add the ending -''n'' denoting second person singular and get the form ''mijjin''. For another type of verb (henceforth referred to as the ''a'' verbs) we take the base form ''amalga-'' and add -''n'' to get ''amalgan'' (you dance) and to get the first person singular we add -''i''. Please note that it has been hypothesized that there are at least eleven different conjugations. We will only be dealing with a couple here. Because of reasons of time limitation, I was not able to elicit all eleven types but when there is a difference in conjugation, that will be noted. Note that in the plural the ''u'' or ''w'' comes after ''-ulti-''. This could be due the the fact that ''-ulti-'' is the plural affix that attaches to the base form of the verb and does not convey anything about the tense of the verb, rather it is used to denote that the verb is plural. Thus the ''u'' or ''w'' comes right before the tense marker which is always at the end of the verb. For the first person singular in present there is a null tense marker at the end of some verbs (for example the ''-i'' verbs) thus the negative marker is at the end.

== Present Tense ==
First is a comparison of the affirmative and negated paradigms of the verb ''mijji'' ('eat').

{| class="wikitable"
|+ mijji- 'eat'
|-
! scope="col" colspan="2"| ↓person / number→
! scope="col" | SG
! scope="col" | DU
! scope="col" | PL
|-
! scope="row" rowspan="2"| 1
! scope="row"| 13
| rowspan="2" | mijji
|mijjieg
|mijjultieg
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| mijji'gw
| mijjulti'gw
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2" | 2
| mijjin
| mijjioq
| mijjultioq
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2"| 3
| mijjit
| mijjijig
| mijjultijig
|-
|}

{| class="wikitable"
|+ mu mijji- 'not eat'
|-
! scope="col" colspan="2"| ↓person / number→
! scope="col" | SG
! scope="col" | DU
! scope="col" | PL
|-
! scope="row" rowspan="2"| 1
! scope="row"| 13
| rowspan="2" | mu mijjiw
| mu mijjiweg
| mu mijjultiweg
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| mu mijjigw
| mu mijjultigw
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2" | 2
| mu mijjiun
| mu mijjiwoq
| mu mijjultiwoq
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2"| 3
| mu mijjigw
| mu mijji'gw
| mu mijjulti'gw
|-
|}

The word ''mu'' signifies negation. When ''mu'' is in front of the verb, the verb must also be conjugated in the negative form. In the above table we see the intrusion of the sound ''u'', ''ew'' or ''w''. The following table illustrates the endings for the present negative tense, keeping in mind ''mu'' must ALWAYS come right before the negated verb. When ''mu'' precedes a verb it must ALWAYS be in the negated form.

Below is a table that summarizes the VAI -i stem negative person endings in present conjugation. Inanimate [IN] conjugation was taken from the Micmac Grammar (1976, pg 155).

{| class="wikitable"
|+ VAI -i stem negative present person endings
|-
! scope="col" colspan="2"| ↓person / number→
! scope="col" | SG
! scope="col" | DU
! scope="col" | PL
|-
! scope="row" rowspan="2"| 1
! scope="row"| 13
| rowspan="2" |-u
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2" | 2
| -
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2"| 3.AN
| -
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2"| 3.IN
| -
| -
| -
|-
|}

The forms for the first person dual and plural in the exclusive and inclusive forms are the same. As shown by other data, the dual form seems to be in the process of disappearing. This is one such example where the dual form does not exist for the plural first person. Some younger speakers do not use the dual form at all so it is not surprising that we find a gap in the dual form here. All this is according to the speaker but if we followed the pattern of the previous forms we would expect the dual form for the inclusive and exclusive first person to be ''-ieweg''. "When the verb is negated, then the -g third person is ALWAYS found" (Micmac Grammar, 1976 pg 93).

Below is a comparison of different verbs to give an idea of how to conjugate different types of verbs in the negated form. All forms are conjugated in the present singular third person animate. The form of -''elie-'' was taken from Micmac Grammar (pg 155). For more detail about these forms see [[VAI]].

{| class="wikitable"
! VAI stem || Base Form || Gloss || Affirmative || Gloss || Negated || Gloss
|-
| -i
| mijji-
| eat
| mijjit
| s/he eats
| mu mijjigw
| s/he does not eat
|-
| -a
| amalga-
| dance
| amalgat
| s/he dances
| mu amalgagw
| s/he does not dance
|-
| -a'si
| ala'si-
| go around
| ala'sit
| s/he goes around
| mu ala'sigw
| s/he does not go around
|-
| -e
| elie-
| go
| eliet
| s/he goes
| mu eliegw
| s/he does not go
|-
|}

For verb conjugations in the affirmative please see [http://firstnationhelp.com/ali/posters/pdf/verb_conjugation.pdf Mi'kmaq Verb Conjugation]. As you can see, this site uses the verb ''mijisi'' meaning 'to eat'. In Listuguj this is not used as the word for to eat because it sounds too close for the verb ''mejisi'' 'to excrete'.

=== Transitive ===
Below is the conjugation in present of a transitive verb that takes an inanimate object.

{| class="wikitable" style="text-align:center"
|+ VTI Conjugation Class 1: -m class
|-
! scope="col" | ↓subject / object→
! scope="col" | 0SG
! scope="col" | 0PL
|-
! scope="row" | 1
| malqutm
| malqutmann
|-
! scope="row" | 13
| malqutmeg
| malqutmegl
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| malqutmu'g
| malqutmu'gul
|-
! scope="row" | 2
| malqutmn
| malqutmnn
|-
! scope="row" | 2PL
| malqutmoq
| malqutmoqol
|-
! scope="row" | 3
| malqutmeg
| malqutmegl
|-
! scope="row" | 3PL
| malqutmi'tij
| malqutmi'titl
|}

{| class="wikitable" style="text-align:center"
|+ VTI Negative Conjugation Class 1: -m class
|-
! scope="col" | ↓subject / object→
! scope="col" | 0SG
! scope="col" | 0PL
|-
! scope="row" | 1
| mu malqutmu
| mu malqutmuann
|-
! scope="row" | 13
| mu malqutmueg
| mu malqutmuegl
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| mu malqutmugg
| mu malqutmuggul
|-
! scope="row" | 2
| mu malqutmu'n
| mu malqutmu'nn
|-
! scope="row" | 2PL
| mu malqutmuoq
| mu malqutmuoqol
|-
! scope="row" | 3
| mu malqutmug
| mu malqutmugul
|-
! scope="row" | 3PL
| mu malqutmi'tigw
| mu malqutmi'tigul
|-
|}

{| class="wikitable" style="text-align:center"
|+ VTI Negative Conjugation Class 1: -m class
|-
! scope="col" | ↓subject / object→
! scope="col" | 0SG
! scope="col" | 0PL
|-
! scope="row" | 1
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 13
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 12
|
|
|-
! scope="row" | 2
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 2PL
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 3
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 3PL
| -
| -
|-
|}

== Imperative ==
Here is the formation of the affirmative imperative:
{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijji-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 2 Second person
| mijji
| mijjigw
| mijjultigw
|-
|}

Now we compare it to the negated:
{| class="wikitable"
! ''mutt mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 2 Second person
| mutt mijjiw
| mutt mijjinew
| mutt mijjultinew
|-
|}

== Past Tense ==
Again for the past we compare the past and the negated past.

{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| mijjiap
| mijjieg'p
| mijjultieg'p
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| mijji'gup
| mijjulti'gup
|-
| 2 Second person
| mijjit'p
| mijjioqop
| mijjultioqop
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| mijjip
| mijjipni'g
| mijjultipni'g
|}

Now let us look at the negated forms.

{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| mu mijjiwap
| mu mijjiweg'p
| mu mijjultiweg'p
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| mu mijjiwgup
| mu mijjultiwgup/mijjultiggup
|-
| 2 Second person
| mu mijjiwt'p
| mu mijjiwoqop
| mu mijjultiwoqop
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| mu mijjigup
| mu mijjigupnig
| mu mijjultigupnig
|}

Thus this would be the conjugation of the negated form:

{| class="wikitable"
! Negated Past||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| -
| -
| -
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| -
| -
|-
| 2 Second person
| -
| -
| -
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| -
|
|
|}

For the third person the -''ug'p'' can change to -''ewgp'' for example:

<gl>
\gll Mu ala'ti-we-g'p
not go-NEG-SG.PAST
\trans She didn't go
</gl>

== Future Tense ==
First let us compare the affirmative tense for eat:

{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| mijjias
| ?
| mijjit'snen
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
|
| mijjit'snu
|-
| 2 Second person
| mijjit's(g)
| ?
| mijjitoqs'p
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| mijjitew
| ''n/a''
| mijjultitaq
|}
I was not able to elicit dual forms.

We compare the future affirmative with the negated below:

{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| ma mijjiew
| ma mijjiug
| ma mijjiug
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| ma mijjiug
| ma mijjiug
|-
| 2 Second person
| ma mijjiwn
| ?
| ?
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| ma mijjiewg
| ''n/a''
| ma mijjultiewoq
|}
NOTE: In the future the ''mu'' changes to ''ma'' !! Like ''mu'', ''ma'' must always come before the verb conjugated in the negative future.
The correspondent was not able to produce a dual form in the future.

Now here is a paradigm of the negated endings in the future.

{| class="wikitable"
! Negated Future||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| -ew
| -ug
| -ug
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| -ug
| -ug
|-
| 2 Second person
| -iwn
| ?
| ?
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| -ewg
| ''n/a''
| -ultiwoq
|}

As you may have noticed the future tense is easy! The verbs take the same endings as the negated present tense but the ''mu'' is replaced with ''ma'' thus indicating future.

== When negation is used ==

When the verb is negated there must always find a negative particle (like ''mu'' or ''ma''). If not the sentence is ungrammatical as shown below:

<gl>
\gll *gis-wissugwatige-w
can-cook.1-NEG
\trans I cannot cook (intended meaning)
</gl>

The only form of the above sentence must be:

<gl>
\gll ma gis-wissugwatige-w
NEG can-cook.1-NEG
\trans I cannot cook
</gl>

Thus it is seen that ''ma'' comes before the verb, now making the sentence grammatical.

''ma'' always precedes the future tense AND when the ''gis'' prefix is attached to the verb conjugated in the present for example:

<gl>
\gll ma gis-amalga-w-g
NEG can-dance-NEG-3
\trans s/he cannot dance
</gl>

There are some expressions that always take the negative form of the verb such as ''me menga'' (not yet) and ''mowen'' (nobody) that take the negative form of the verb: (examples from [http://www.mikmaqonline.org/ Mi'gmaq Online Dictionary])

<gl>
\gll me menag newt ajetten-u-g
NEG yet one time-NEG-3
\trans it is not one o’clock yet
</gl>

<gl>
\gll mo-wen mijie-w-g
NEG-who eat-NEG-3
\trans no one is eating
</gl>

<gl>
\gll moqwa' goqwei eign-u-g
no thing be-NEG-3
\trans there is nothing there
</gl>

Below is a list of common particles after which the negated form is used. This list is not complete but these are the most common forms.

{| class="wikitable"
! Particle || When used || Translation
|-
| ''mu''
| before negated present and past
| not
|-
| ''mutt''
| before negated imperative
| do not
|-
| ''lpa mu''
| before negated present and past
| not even
|-
| ''mowen''
| before negated present, past and future
| no one/nobody
|-
| ''moqwa' goqwei'''
| before negated present, past and future
| nothing
|-
| ''me menag''
| before negated verb
| not yet
|-
| ''ma''
| before negated future verb and preverb ''gis'' (can)
| not
|-
|}

''moqwa' goqwei'' is also spelled ''mu goqwei'' and a variant of this is ''mu'' + negated verb + ''goqwei'' when used in object position. It is inanimate. As in the following example:

<gl>
\gll mu malqutem-u goqwei
NEG eat.1>0-NEG what
\trans I eat nothing
</gl>

== Negative Concord ==
As can be seen above, Mi'gmaq is a negative concord language. Negative concord is where "double or multiple negative[s] [do] not express an affirmative but a negative" (van der Wouden & Zwarts, 1992). This is similar to French ''Je n'ai vue personne'' 'I have seen nobody' where both the ''ne'' and ''personne'' are both negative but the resulting sentence is negative, rather than each cancelling the other out resulting in a affirmative sentence, i.e. 'I have seen someone'. Mi'gmaq has negation marked in two places with both negative particles, i.e. ''mu'' & ''ma'', and a negative conjugation of the verb, i.e. with ''-u'' or ''-w'' added. Compare examples <glr id="1"/> and <glr id="2"/>.

<gl id="1">
\gll lpa'tuj eigu-p
boy be.there.PST-SG
\trans the boy was there
</gl>

<gl id="2">
\gll lpa'tuj mu eimu-g-u-p
boy NEG be.there-PST-NEG-SG
\trans the boy was not there
</gl>

= Word Order =
The negative particle (or possibly affix) ''mu'' always appears before the verb it negates. Although words can intervene between ''mu'' and the verb it negates, ''mu'' must always precede the verb.

<gl>
\gll Mali mu amal-gag-u-p
Mali NEG dance-PAST-NEG-SG
\trans Mali did not dance
</gl>

<gl>
\gll mu Mali amal-gag-u-p
NEG Mali dance-PAST-NEG-SG
\trans Mali did not dance
</gl>

Placement of ''mu'' post-verbally results in ungrammaticality, as illustrated below.

<gl>
\gll lpa'tuj mu eimug-u-p
boy NEG be.there.PST-NEG-SG
\trans the boy was not there
</gl>

Acceptable word orders:
*mu eimugup lpa'tuj
*mu lpa'tuj eimugup

Unacceptable word orders:
* *eimugup lpa'tuj mu
* *eimugup mu lpa'tuj
* *lpa'tuj eimugup mu

Furthermore, with regards to word order, it appears that negation must come right before the constituent it negates. Here is an example sentence without negation:

<gl>
\gll ula na lpa'tuj ta'n egitgup wigatign
this DEM boy that read.PST book
\trans this is the boy that read the book
</gl>

If we want to negate the first clause, as to say "This is '''not''' the boy that read the book", negation must directly precede 'boy'.

<gl>
\gll ula na mu lpa'tuj ta'n egitgup wigatign
this DEM NEG boy that read.PST book
\trans this is not the boy that read the book
</gl>

The following word orders for negation in the first clause are impossible:
* *ula na lpa'tuj mu...
* *ula mu na lpa'tuj...
* *mu ula na lpa'tuj...

If we want to negate the second clause, as to say "This is the boy that did '''not''' read the book", the word order may be varied, as long as negation comes before the verb (as discussed previously).

== Scope of Negation ==
As stated above, ''mu'' always comes before the verb. There may be particles that intrude between ''mu'' and the negated verb, but as long as ''mu'' comes before the negated verb, the structure is grammatical. [http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED136614.pdf Micmac Grammar, 1976] Sometimes the meaning of the sentence can change depending on the position of ''mu''.

<gl>
\gll egjitm Mali mu amal-gag-u-p
possible Mali NEG dance-PST-NEG-SG
\trans it is true that Mali did not dance
</gl>

<gl>
\gll mu egjitm Mali amal-gag-u-p
NEG possible Mali dance-PST.NEG.SG
\trans it is not true that Mali danced
</gl>

We would also expect phrases with adverb-like particles translatable as "it is possible" or "it is true" or "it is obvious" would also vary regarding negation.

=Language change and negation=
Often I was not able to elicit both the dual and plural forms of a verb. There are many times when I could only elicit the dual form, or times when the dual and plural forms were the same. It has been noted by our consultants that younger speakers are not using the plural forms but are using the dual form to mean both dual and plural. This seems be a language change happening currently in the speech community where the younger generation is leading the change. As noted in the paradigm above for 'eat' in the negated present tense, both dual and plural forms are the same. Here it seems that the plural form is used for both dual and plural meanings. This would strongly suggest a change happening in the speech community.

=References=
Clark, Jeremiah S. "A Dictionary of the Micmac Language." Rand's Micmac Dictionary. Charlottetown, PEI: The Patriot Publishing Company, 1902. Print.

Delisle, Gill L., and Manny L. Metallic. Micmac Teaching Grammar. Ecowi, QC: Thunderbird Press, 1976. Print.

L'Abbe Maillard, M. Grammaire De La Langue Mikmaque. New York: Presse Cramoisy de Jean-Marie Shea, 1864. Print.

Metallic, Janine. "Mi'gmaq Elicitation Session for Field Methods of Linguistics." Ed. Class, Carol Little and LING415. Montreal, QC: n/a, 2011. Print.

Payne, Thomas Edward. Describing Morphosyntax: a Guide for Field Linguists. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge UP, 2008. Print.

Paul-Martin, Patsy. "Mi'kmaq Verb Conjugation." Ed. Orthography, Mi'kmaq Talking Posters Smith/Francis. Truto, NS: Eastern Woodland Print Communications, 2011. Print.

Proulx, Paul. "Proto-Algonquian Verb Inflection." Studies in Native American Languages 15.2 (1990): 100-45. Print.

van der Wouden, Ton, and Frans Zwarts. "Negative Concord." D. Gilbers and S. Looyenga (eds), Language and Cognition 2. Yearbook 1992 Linguistic Theory and Knowledge Representation of the University of Groningen (1992): 317-31. Print.

Negation

2014-08-07T18:53:23Z

Carol: /* Past Tense */

=Introduction=
Negation is the process of turning affirmative statements into the opposite form. For example, the negative equivalent of affirmative sentence, ''I am eating'' is ''I am not eating''. In English there are a few processes at work. ''not'' must always come with an auxiliary verb like the verb 'to have' and 'to be'. In Mi'gmaq, with its extremely detailed and expansive verb conjugations in the present, it is not surprising that the negated conjugation of verbs is just as detailed and expansive as they are in the affirmative.

To start off any commentary on negation, it seems fitting to start of with the word "no" which is ''moqwa'' in Mi'gmaq. (The opposite of this is ''e'e'' , meaning "yes".) Negation in Mi'gmaq is similar to that of Obijwe in that there is both an affix that occurs between the verb and the person marker and a word that comes before the verb denoting negation. See [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ojibwe_grammar#Verbs Verb Conjugation in Ojibwe]. The Mi'gmaq negated affix is ''w'' or ''u'' which is very closely related to the Proto-Algonquian form for negation which is is ''*-w'' ( [http://kuscholarworks.ku.edu/dspace/bitstream/1808/440/1/ling.wp.v15.n2.paper6.pdf Proulx, 1990] ). ''w'' or ''u'' are very closely related phonetically since ''w'' is the semivowel corresponding to the vowel ''u''. Bear in mind that during the elicitation sessions, sometimes it was unsure whether to use ''w'' or ''u''.

Negation in Mi'gmaq consists of adding ''mu'' or ''ma'' then the verb conjugated in the negated verb form. After ''mu'' or ''ma'' the verb must always contain a negative particle. We must think of these two things as inseparable. ''mu'' always comes before the negative conjugated verb in the present or past, and ''ma'' always comes before future or if the prefix ''gis'' ('can', 'to be able to') is attached to the verb. All other prefixes abide by the rules ''mu'' before present or past and ''ma'' before future. There are other particles that take the negated form of the verb, but it is obvious that these particles express a negated idea.

Please note as well that in some of the studies on Mi'gmaq and Algonquian languages the term 'nonaffirmative' is used to describe the negated form. For consistency in this report, I will use the term 'negated' to indicate the form of the verb which is the opposite of affirmative. 'Nonaffirmative' and 'negated' however refer to the same process of negation.

= Conjugation of the Negated Verb =
I have selected the verb ''mijji'' (to eat). Please note that some resources spell this like ''mijji'' where other spell it ''miji'' ([http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED136614.pdf Micmac Teaching Grammar, 1976]). I have selected the spelling from [http://www.mikmaqonline.org/servlet/dictionaryFrameSet.html?arg0=mijjit&method=searchFromMikmaq the Migmaq talking dictionary]. It is also important to note that the Micmac Teaching Grammar uses an orthography that is different of all other orthographies used with Mi'gmaq. I will indicate which terms they are and give the Listuguj equivalent orthographical manner of writing them.

The simplified formula for the conjugation in the negated form: the base form + ''u'' or ''w'' + person ending ([http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED136614.pdf Micmac Teaching Grammar, 1976])
The base form for intransitive verbs is always the verb in the first person singular. For example I eat is ''mijji''. Now to create the second person singular we add the ending -''n'' denoting second person singular and get the form ''mijjin''. For another type of verb (henceforth referred to as the ''a'' verbs) we take the base form ''amalga-'' and add -''n'' to get ''amalgan'' (you dance) and to get the first person singular we add -''i''. Please note that it has been hypothesized that there are at least eleven different conjugations. We will only be dealing with a couple here. Because of reasons of time limitation, I was not able to elicit all eleven types but when there is a difference in conjugation, that will be noted. Note that in the plural the ''u'' or ''w'' comes after ''-ulti-''. This could be due the the fact that ''-ulti-'' is the plural affix that attaches to the base form of the verb and does not convey anything about the tense of the verb, rather it is used to denote that the verb is plural. Thus the ''u'' or ''w'' comes right before the tense marker which is always at the end of the verb. For the first person singular in present there is a null tense marker at the end of some verbs (for example the ''-i'' verbs) thus the negative marker is at the end.

== Present Tense ==
First is a comparison of the affirmative and negated paradigms of the verb ''mijji'' ('eat').

{| class="wikitable"
|+ mijji- 'eat'
|-
! scope="col" colspan="2"| ↓person / number→
! scope="col" | SG
! scope="col" | DU
! scope="col" | PL
|-
! scope="row" rowspan="2"| 1
! scope="row"| 13
| rowspan="2" | mijji
|mijjieg
|mijjultieg
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| mijji'gw
| mijjulti'gw
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2" | 2
| mijjin
| mijjioq
| mijjultioq
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2"| 3
| mijjit
| mijjijig
| mijjultijig
|-
|}

{| class="wikitable"
|+ mu mijji- 'not eat'
|-
! scope="col" colspan="2"| ↓person / number→
! scope="col" | SG
! scope="col" | DU
! scope="col" | PL
|-
! scope="row" rowspan="2"| 1
! scope="row"| 13
| rowspan="2" | mu mijjiw
| mu mijjiweg
| mu mijjultiweg
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| mu mijjigw
| mu mijjultigw
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2" | 2
| mu mijjiun
| mu mijjiwoq
| mu mijjultiwoq
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2"| 3
| mu mijjigw
| mu mijji'gw
| mu mijjulti'gw
|-
|}

The word ''mu'' signifies negation. When ''mu'' is in front of the verb, the verb must also be conjugated in the negative form. In the above table we see the intrusion of the sound ''u'', ''ew'' or ''w''. The following table illustrates the endings for the present negative tense, keeping in mind ''mu'' must ALWAYS come right before the negated verb. When ''mu'' precedes a verb it must ALWAYS be in the negated form.

Below is a table that summarizes the VAI -i stem negative person endings in present conjugation. Inanimate [IN] conjugation was taken from the Micmac Grammar (1976, pg 155).

{| class="wikitable"
|+ VAI -i stem negative present person endings
|-
! scope="col" colspan="2"| ↓person / number→
! scope="col" | SG
! scope="col" | DU
! scope="col" | PL
|-
! scope="row" rowspan="2"| 1
! scope="row"| 13
| rowspan="2" |-u
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2" | 2
| -
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2"| 3.AN
| -
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2"| 3.IN
| -
| -
| -
|-
|}

The forms for the first person dual and plural in the exclusive and inclusive forms are the same. As shown by other data, the dual form seems to be in the process of disappearing. This is one such example where the dual form does not exist for the plural first person. Some younger speakers do not use the dual form at all so it is not surprising that we find a gap in the dual form here. All this is according to the speaker but if we followed the pattern of the previous forms we would expect the dual form for the inclusive and exclusive first person to be ''-ieweg''. "When the verb is negated, then the -g third person is ALWAYS found" (Micmac Grammar, 1976 pg 93).

Below is a comparison of different verbs to give an idea of how to conjugate different types of verbs in the negated form. All forms are conjugated in the present singular third person animate. The form of -''elie-'' was taken from Micmac Grammar (pg 155). For more detail about these forms see [[VAI]].

{| class="wikitable"
! VAI stem || Base Form || Gloss || Affirmative || Gloss || Negated || Gloss
|-
| -i
| mijji-
| eat
| mijjit
| s/he eats
| mu mijjigw
| s/he does not eat
|-
| -a
| amalga-
| dance
| amalgat
| s/he dances
| mu amalgagw
| s/he does not dance
|-
| -a'si
| ala'si-
| go around
| ala'sit
| s/he goes around
| mu ala'sigw
| s/he does not go around
|-
| -e
| elie-
| go
| eliet
| s/he goes
| mu eliegw
| s/he does not go
|-
|}

For verb conjugations in the affirmative please see [http://firstnationhelp.com/ali/posters/pdf/verb_conjugation.pdf Mi'kmaq Verb Conjugation]. As you can see, this site uses the verb ''mijisi'' meaning 'to eat'. In Listuguj this is not used as the word for to eat because it sounds too close for the verb ''mejisi'' 'to excrete'.

=== Transitive ===
Below is the conjugation in present of a transitive verb that takes an inanimate object.

{| class="wikitable" style="text-align:center"
|+ VTI Conjugation Class 1: -m class
|-
! scope="col" | ↓subject / object→
! scope="col" | 0SG
! scope="col" | 0PL
|-
! scope="row" | 1
| malqutm
| malqutmann
|-
! scope="row" | 13
| malqutmeg
| malqutmegl
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| malqutmu'g
| malqutmu'gul
|-
! scope="row" | 2
| malqutmn
| malqutmnn
|-
! scope="row" | 2PL
| malqutmoq
| malqutmoqol
|-
! scope="row" | 3
| malqutmeg
| malqutmegl
|-
! scope="row" | 3PL
| malqutmi'tij
| malqutmi'titl
|}

{| class="wikitable" style="text-align:center"
|+ VTI Negative Conjugation Class 1: -m class
|-
! scope="col" | ↓subject / object→
! scope="col" | 0SG
! scope="col" | 0PL
|-
! scope="row" | 1
| mu malqutmu
| mu malqutmuann
|-
! scope="row" | 13
| mu malqutmueg
| mu malqutmuegl
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| mu malqutmugg
| mu malqutmuggul
|-
! scope="row" | 2
| mu malqutmu'n
| mu malqutmu'nn
|-
! scope="row" | 2PL
| mu malqutmuoq
| mu malqutmuoqol
|-
! scope="row" | 3
| mu malqutmug
| mu malqutmugul
|-
! scope="row" | 3PL
| mu malqutmi'tigw
| mu malqutmi'tigul
|-
|}

{| class="wikitable" style="text-align:center"
|+ VTI Negative Conjugation Class 1: -m class
|-
! scope="col" | ↓subject / object→
! scope="col" | 0SG
! scope="col" | 0PL
|-
! scope="row" | 1
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 13
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 12
|
|
|-
! scope="row" | 2
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 2PL
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 3
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 3PL
| -
| -
|-
|}

== Imperative ==
Here is the formation of the affirmative imperative:
{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijji-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 2 Second person
| mijji
| mijjigw
| mijjultigw
|-
|}

Now we compare it to the negated:
{| class="wikitable"
! ''mutt mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 2 Second person
| mutt mijjiw
| mutt mijjinew
| mutt mijjultinew
|-
|}

== Past Tense ==
Again for the past we compare the past and the negated past.

{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| mijjiap
| mijjieg'p
| mijjultieg'p
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| mijji'gup
| mijjulti'gup
|-
| 2 Second person
| mijjit'p
| mijjioqop
| mijjultioqop
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| mijjip
| mijjipni'g
| mijjultipni'g
|}

Now let us look at the negated forms.

{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| mu mijjiwap
| mu mijjiweg'p
| mu mijjultiweg'p
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| mu mijjiwgup
| mu mijjultiwgup/mijjultiggup
|-
| 2 Second person
| mu mijjiwt'p
| mu mijjiwoqop
| mu mijjultiwoqop
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| mu mijjigup
| mu mijjigupnig
| mu mijjultigupnig
|}

Thus this would be the conjugation of the negated form:

{| class="wikitable"
! Negated Past||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| -
| -
| -
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| -
| -
|-
| 2 Second person
| -
| -
| -
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| -
|
|
|}

For the third person the -''ug'p'' can change to -''ewgp'' for example:

<gl>
\gll Mu ala'si-ew-g'p
not go-NEG-SG.PAST
\trans She didn't go
</gl>

== Future Tense ==
First let us compare the affirmative tense for eat:

{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| mijjias
| ?
| mijjit'snen
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
|
| mijjit'snu
|-
| 2 Second person
| mijjit's(g)
| ?
| mijjitoqs'p
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| mijjitew
| ''n/a''
| mijjultitaq
|}
I was not able to elicit dual forms.

We compare the future affirmative with the negated below:

{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| ma mijjiew
| ma mijjiug
| ma mijjiug
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| ma mijjiug
| ma mijjiug
|-
| 2 Second person
| ma mijjiwn
| ?
| ?
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| ma mijjiewg
| ''n/a''
| ma mijjultiewoq
|}
NOTE: In the future the ''mu'' changes to ''ma'' !! Like ''mu'', ''ma'' must always come before the verb conjugated in the negative future.
The correspondent was not able to produce a dual form in the future.

Now here is a paradigm of the negated endings in the future.

{| class="wikitable"
! Negated Future||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| -ew
| -ug
| -ug
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| -ug
| -ug
|-
| 2 Second person
| -iwn
| ?
| ?
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| -ewg
| ''n/a''
| -ultiwoq
|}

As you may have noticed the future tense is easy! The verbs take the same endings as the negated present tense but the ''mu'' is replaced with ''ma'' thus indicating future.

== When negation is used ==

When the verb is negated there must always find a negative particle (like ''mu'' or ''ma''). If not the sentence is ungrammatical as shown below:

<gl>
\gll *gis-wissugwatige-w
can-cook.1-NEG
\trans I cannot cook (intended meaning)
</gl>

The only form of the above sentence must be:

<gl>
\gll ma gis-wissugwatige-w
NEG can-cook.1-NEG
\trans I cannot cook
</gl>

Thus it is seen that ''ma'' comes before the verb, now making the sentence grammatical.

''ma'' always precedes the future tense AND when the ''gis'' prefix is attached to the verb conjugated in the present for example:

<gl>
\gll ma gis-amalga-w-g
NEG can-dance-NEG-3
\trans s/he cannot dance
</gl>

There are some expressions that always take the negative form of the verb such as ''me menga'' (not yet) and ''mowen'' (nobody) that take the negative form of the verb: (examples from [http://www.mikmaqonline.org/ Mi'gmaq Online Dictionary])

<gl>
\gll me menag newt ajetten-u-g
NEG yet one time-NEG-3
\trans it is not one o’clock yet
</gl>

<gl>
\gll mo-wen mijie-w-g
NEG-who eat-NEG-3
\trans no one is eating
</gl>

<gl>
\gll moqwa' goqwei eign-u-g
no thing be-NEG-3
\trans there is nothing there
</gl>

Below is a list of common particles after which the negated form is used. This list is not complete but these are the most common forms.

{| class="wikitable"
! Particle || When used || Translation
|-
| ''mu''
| before negated present and past
| not
|-
| ''mutt''
| before negated imperative
| do not
|-
| ''lpa mu''
| before negated present and past
| not even
|-
| ''mowen''
| before negated present, past and future
| no one/nobody
|-
| ''moqwa' goqwei'''
| before negated present, past and future
| nothing
|-
| ''me menag''
| before negated verb
| not yet
|-
| ''ma''
| before negated future verb and preverb ''gis'' (can)
| not
|-
|}

''moqwa' goqwei'' is also spelled ''mu goqwei'' and a variant of this is ''mu'' + negated verb + ''goqwei'' when used in object position. It is inanimate. As in the following example:

<gl>
\gll mu malqutem-u goqwei
NEG eat.1>0-NEG what
\trans I eat nothing
</gl>

== Negative Concord ==
As can be seen above, Mi'gmaq is a negative concord language. Negative concord is where "double or multiple negative[s] [do] not express an affirmative but a negative" (van der Wouden & Zwarts, 1992). This is similar to French ''Je n'ai vue personne'' 'I have seen nobody' where both the ''ne'' and ''personne'' are both negative but the resulting sentence is negative, rather than each cancelling the other out resulting in a affirmative sentence, i.e. 'I have seen someone'. Mi'gmaq has negation marked in two places with both negative particles, i.e. ''mu'' & ''ma'', and a negative conjugation of the verb, i.e. with ''-u'' or ''-w'' added. Compare examples <glr id="1"/> and <glr id="2"/>.

<gl id="1">
\gll lpa'tuj eigu-p
boy be.there.PST-SG
\trans the boy was there
</gl>

<gl id="2">
\gll lpa'tuj mu eimu-g-u-p
boy NEG be.there-PST-NEG-SG
\trans the boy was not there
</gl>

= Word Order =
The negative particle (or possibly affix) ''mu'' always appears before the verb it negates. Although words can intervene between ''mu'' and the verb it negates, ''mu'' must always precede the verb.

<gl>
\gll Mali mu amal-gag-u-p
Mali NEG dance-PAST-NEG-SG
\trans Mali did not dance
</gl>

<gl>
\gll mu Mali amal-gag-u-p
NEG Mali dance-PAST-NEG-SG
\trans Mali did not dance
</gl>

Placement of ''mu'' post-verbally results in ungrammaticality, as illustrated below.

<gl>
\gll lpa'tuj mu eimug-u-p
boy NEG be.there.PST-NEG-SG
\trans the boy was not there
</gl>

Acceptable word orders:
*mu eimugup lpa'tuj
*mu lpa'tuj eimugup

Unacceptable word orders:
* *eimugup lpa'tuj mu
* *eimugup mu lpa'tuj
* *lpa'tuj eimugup mu

Furthermore, with regards to word order, it appears that negation must come right before the constituent it negates. Here is an example sentence without negation:

<gl>
\gll ula na lpa'tuj ta'n egitgup wigatign
this DEM boy that read.PST book
\trans this is the boy that read the book
</gl>

If we want to negate the first clause, as to say "This is '''not''' the boy that read the book", negation must directly precede 'boy'.

<gl>
\gll ula na mu lpa'tuj ta'n egitgup wigatign
this DEM NEG boy that read.PST book
\trans this is not the boy that read the book
</gl>

The following word orders for negation in the first clause are impossible:
* *ula na lpa'tuj mu...
* *ula mu na lpa'tuj...
* *mu ula na lpa'tuj...

If we want to negate the second clause, as to say "This is the boy that did '''not''' read the book", the word order may be varied, as long as negation comes before the verb (as discussed previously).

== Scope of Negation ==
As stated above, ''mu'' always comes before the verb. There may be particles that intrude between ''mu'' and the negated verb, but as long as ''mu'' comes before the negated verb, the structure is grammatical. [http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED136614.pdf Micmac Grammar, 1976] Sometimes the meaning of the sentence can change depending on the position of ''mu''.

<gl>
\gll egjitm Mali mu amal-gag-u-p
possible Mali NEG dance-PST-NEG-SG
\trans it is true that Mali did not dance
</gl>

<gl>
\gll mu egjitm Mali amal-gag-u-p
NEG possible Mali dance-PST.NEG.SG
\trans it is not true that Mali danced
</gl>

We would also expect phrases with adverb-like particles translatable as "it is possible" or "it is true" or "it is obvious" would also vary regarding negation.

=Language change and negation=
Often I was not able to elicit both the dual and plural forms of a verb. There are many times when I could only elicit the dual form, or times when the dual and plural forms were the same. It has been noted by our consultants that younger speakers are not using the plural forms but are using the dual form to mean both dual and plural. This seems be a language change happening currently in the speech community where the younger generation is leading the change. As noted in the paradigm above for 'eat' in the negated present tense, both dual and plural forms are the same. Here it seems that the plural form is used for both dual and plural meanings. This would strongly suggest a change happening in the speech community.

=References=
Clark, Jeremiah S. "A Dictionary of the Micmac Language." Rand's Micmac Dictionary. Charlottetown, PEI: The Patriot Publishing Company, 1902. Print.

Delisle, Gill L., and Manny L. Metallic. Micmac Teaching Grammar. Ecowi, QC: Thunderbird Press, 1976. Print.

L'Abbe Maillard, M. Grammaire De La Langue Mikmaque. New York: Presse Cramoisy de Jean-Marie Shea, 1864. Print.

Metallic, Janine. "Mi'gmaq Elicitation Session for Field Methods of Linguistics." Ed. Class, Carol Little and LING415. Montreal, QC: n/a, 2011. Print.

Payne, Thomas Edward. Describing Morphosyntax: a Guide for Field Linguists. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge UP, 2008. Print.

Paul-Martin, Patsy. "Mi'kmaq Verb Conjugation." Ed. Orthography, Mi'kmaq Talking Posters Smith/Francis. Truto, NS: Eastern Woodland Print Communications, 2011. Print.

Proulx, Paul. "Proto-Algonquian Verb Inflection." Studies in Native American Languages 15.2 (1990): 100-45. Print.

van der Wouden, Ton, and Frans Zwarts. "Negative Concord." D. Gilbers and S. Looyenga (eds), Language and Cognition 2. Yearbook 1992 Linguistic Theory and Knowledge Representation of the University of Groningen (1992): 317-31. Print.

Negation

2014-08-07T18:34:57Z

Carol: /* Past Tense */

=Introduction=
Negation is the process of turning affirmative statements into the opposite form. For example, the negative equivalent of affirmative sentence, ''I am eating'' is ''I am not eating''. In English there are a few processes at work. ''not'' must always come with an auxiliary verb like the verb 'to have' and 'to be'. In Mi'gmaq, with its extremely detailed and expansive verb conjugations in the present, it is not surprising that the negated conjugation of verbs is just as detailed and expansive as they are in the affirmative.

To start off any commentary on negation, it seems fitting to start of with the word "no" which is ''moqwa'' in Mi'gmaq. (The opposite of this is ''e'e'' , meaning "yes".) Negation in Mi'gmaq is similar to that of Obijwe in that there is both an affix that occurs between the verb and the person marker and a word that comes before the verb denoting negation. See [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ojibwe_grammar#Verbs Verb Conjugation in Ojibwe]. The Mi'gmaq negated affix is ''w'' or ''u'' which is very closely related to the Proto-Algonquian form for negation which is is ''*-w'' ( [http://kuscholarworks.ku.edu/dspace/bitstream/1808/440/1/ling.wp.v15.n2.paper6.pdf Proulx, 1990] ). ''w'' or ''u'' are very closely related phonetically since ''w'' is the semivowel corresponding to the vowel ''u''. Bear in mind that during the elicitation sessions, sometimes it was unsure whether to use ''w'' or ''u''.

Negation in Mi'gmaq consists of adding ''mu'' or ''ma'' then the verb conjugated in the negated verb form. After ''mu'' or ''ma'' the verb must always contain a negative particle. We must think of these two things as inseparable. ''mu'' always comes before the negative conjugated verb in the present or past, and ''ma'' always comes before future or if the prefix ''gis'' ('can', 'to be able to') is attached to the verb. All other prefixes abide by the rules ''mu'' before present or past and ''ma'' before future. There are other particles that take the negated form of the verb, but it is obvious that these particles express a negated idea.

Please note as well that in some of the studies on Mi'gmaq and Algonquian languages the term 'nonaffirmative' is used to describe the negated form. For consistency in this report, I will use the term 'negated' to indicate the form of the verb which is the opposite of affirmative. 'Nonaffirmative' and 'negated' however refer to the same process of negation.

= Conjugation of the Negated Verb =
I have selected the verb ''mijji'' (to eat). Please note that some resources spell this like ''mijji'' where other spell it ''miji'' ([http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED136614.pdf Micmac Teaching Grammar, 1976]). I have selected the spelling from [http://www.mikmaqonline.org/servlet/dictionaryFrameSet.html?arg0=mijjit&method=searchFromMikmaq the Migmaq talking dictionary]. It is also important to note that the Micmac Teaching Grammar uses an orthography that is different of all other orthographies used with Mi'gmaq. I will indicate which terms they are and give the Listuguj equivalent orthographical manner of writing them.

The simplified formula for the conjugation in the negated form: the base form + ''u'' or ''w'' + person ending ([http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED136614.pdf Micmac Teaching Grammar, 1976])
The base form for intransitive verbs is always the verb in the first person singular. For example I eat is ''mijji''. Now to create the second person singular we add the ending -''n'' denoting second person singular and get the form ''mijjin''. For another type of verb (henceforth referred to as the ''a'' verbs) we take the base form ''amalga-'' and add -''n'' to get ''amalgan'' (you dance) and to get the first person singular we add -''i''. Please note that it has been hypothesized that there are at least eleven different conjugations. We will only be dealing with a couple here. Because of reasons of time limitation, I was not able to elicit all eleven types but when there is a difference in conjugation, that will be noted. Note that in the plural the ''u'' or ''w'' comes after ''-ulti-''. This could be due the the fact that ''-ulti-'' is the plural affix that attaches to the base form of the verb and does not convey anything about the tense of the verb, rather it is used to denote that the verb is plural. Thus the ''u'' or ''w'' comes right before the tense marker which is always at the end of the verb. For the first person singular in present there is a null tense marker at the end of some verbs (for example the ''-i'' verbs) thus the negative marker is at the end.

== Present Tense ==
First is a comparison of the affirmative and negated paradigms of the verb ''mijji'' ('eat').

{| class="wikitable"
|+ mijji- 'eat'
|-
! scope="col" colspan="2"| ↓person / number→
! scope="col" | SG
! scope="col" | DU
! scope="col" | PL
|-
! scope="row" rowspan="2"| 1
! scope="row"| 13
| rowspan="2" | mijji
|mijjieg
|mijjultieg
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| mijji'gw
| mijjulti'gw
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2" | 2
| mijjin
| mijjioq
| mijjultioq
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2"| 3
| mijjit
| mijjijig
| mijjultijig
|-
|}

{| class="wikitable"
|+ mu mijji- 'not eat'
|-
! scope="col" colspan="2"| ↓person / number→
! scope="col" | SG
! scope="col" | DU
! scope="col" | PL
|-
! scope="row" rowspan="2"| 1
! scope="row"| 13
| rowspan="2" | mu mijjiw
| mu mijjiweg
| mu mijjultiweg
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| mu mijjigw
| mu mijjultigw
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2" | 2
| mu mijjiun
| mu mijjiwoq
| mu mijjultiwoq
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2"| 3
| mu mijjigw
| mu mijji'gw
| mu mijjulti'gw
|-
|}

The word ''mu'' signifies negation. When ''mu'' is in front of the verb, the verb must also be conjugated in the negative form. In the above table we see the intrusion of the sound ''u'', ''ew'' or ''w''. The following table illustrates the endings for the present negative tense, keeping in mind ''mu'' must ALWAYS come right before the negated verb. When ''mu'' precedes a verb it must ALWAYS be in the negated form.

Below is a table that summarizes the VAI -i stem negative person endings in present conjugation. Inanimate [IN] conjugation was taken from the Micmac Grammar (1976, pg 155).

{| class="wikitable"
|+ VAI -i stem negative present person endings
|-
! scope="col" colspan="2"| ↓person / number→
! scope="col" | SG
! scope="col" | DU
! scope="col" | PL
|-
! scope="row" rowspan="2"| 1
! scope="row"| 13
| rowspan="2" |-u
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2" | 2
| -
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2"| 3.AN
| -
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2"| 3.IN
| -
| -
| -
|-
|}

The forms for the first person dual and plural in the exclusive and inclusive forms are the same. As shown by other data, the dual form seems to be in the process of disappearing. This is one such example where the dual form does not exist for the plural first person. Some younger speakers do not use the dual form at all so it is not surprising that we find a gap in the dual form here. All this is according to the speaker but if we followed the pattern of the previous forms we would expect the dual form for the inclusive and exclusive first person to be ''-ieweg''. "When the verb is negated, then the -g third person is ALWAYS found" (Micmac Grammar, 1976 pg 93).

Below is a comparison of different verbs to give an idea of how to conjugate different types of verbs in the negated form. All forms are conjugated in the present singular third person animate. The form of -''elie-'' was taken from Micmac Grammar (pg 155). For more detail about these forms see [[VAI]].

{| class="wikitable"
! VAI stem || Base Form || Gloss || Affirmative || Gloss || Negated || Gloss
|-
| -i
| mijji-
| eat
| mijjit
| s/he eats
| mu mijjigw
| s/he does not eat
|-
| -a
| amalga-
| dance
| amalgat
| s/he dances
| mu amalgagw
| s/he does not dance
|-
| -a'si
| ala'si-
| go around
| ala'sit
| s/he goes around
| mu ala'sigw
| s/he does not go around
|-
| -e
| elie-
| go
| eliet
| s/he goes
| mu eliegw
| s/he does not go
|-
|}

For verb conjugations in the affirmative please see [http://firstnationhelp.com/ali/posters/pdf/verb_conjugation.pdf Mi'kmaq Verb Conjugation]. As you can see, this site uses the verb ''mijisi'' meaning 'to eat'. In Listuguj this is not used as the word for to eat because it sounds too close for the verb ''mejisi'' 'to excrete'.

=== Transitive ===
Below is the conjugation in present of a transitive verb that takes an inanimate object.

{| class="wikitable" style="text-align:center"
|+ VTI Conjugation Class 1: -m class
|-
! scope="col" | ↓subject / object→
! scope="col" | 0SG
! scope="col" | 0PL
|-
! scope="row" | 1
| malqutm
| malqutmann
|-
! scope="row" | 13
| malqutmeg
| malqutmegl
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| malqutmu'g
| malqutmu'gul
|-
! scope="row" | 2
| malqutmn
| malqutmnn
|-
! scope="row" | 2PL
| malqutmoq
| malqutmoqol
|-
! scope="row" | 3
| malqutmeg
| malqutmegl
|-
! scope="row" | 3PL
| malqutmi'tij
| malqutmi'titl
|}

{| class="wikitable" style="text-align:center"
|+ VTI Negative Conjugation Class 1: -m class
|-
! scope="col" | ↓subject / object→
! scope="col" | 0SG
! scope="col" | 0PL
|-
! scope="row" | 1
| mu malqutmu
| mu malqutmuann
|-
! scope="row" | 13
| mu malqutmueg
| mu malqutmuegl
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| mu malqutmugg
| mu malqutmuggul
|-
! scope="row" | 2
| mu malqutmu'n
| mu malqutmu'nn
|-
! scope="row" | 2PL
| mu malqutmuoq
| mu malqutmuoqol
|-
! scope="row" | 3
| mu malqutmug
| mu malqutmugul
|-
! scope="row" | 3PL
| mu malqutmi'tigw
| mu malqutmi'tigul
|-
|}

{| class="wikitable" style="text-align:center"
|+ VTI Negative Conjugation Class 1: -m class
|-
! scope="col" | ↓subject / object→
! scope="col" | 0SG
! scope="col" | 0PL
|-
! scope="row" | 1
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 13
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 12
|
|
|-
! scope="row" | 2
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 2PL
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 3
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 3PL
| -
| -
|-
|}

== Imperative ==
Here is the formation of the affirmative imperative:
{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijji-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 2 Second person
| mijji
| mijjigw
| mijjultigw
|-
|}

Now we compare it to the negated:
{| class="wikitable"
! ''mutt mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 2 Second person
| mutt mijjiw
| mutt mijjinew
| mutt mijjultinew
|-
|}

== Past Tense ==
Again for the past we compare the past and the negated past.

{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| mijjiap
| mijjieg'p
| mijjultieg'p
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| mijji'gup
| mijjulti'gup
|-
| 2 Second person
| mijjit'p
| mijjioqop
| mijjultioqop
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| mijjip
| mijjipni'g
| mijjultipni'g
|}

Now let us look at the negated forms.

{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| mu mijjiwap
| mu mijjiweg'p
| mu mijjultiweg'p
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| mu mijjiwgup
| mu mijjultiwgup/mijjultiggup
|-
| 2 Second person
| mu mijjiewt'p
| mu mijjiewwaq'p
| mu mijjiewwaq'p
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| mu mijjug'p
| ?
| ?
|}

Thus this would be the conjugation of the negated form:

{| class="wikitable"
! Negated Past||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| -ewap
| -ewg'p
| -ewg'p
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| -ewg'p
| -ewg'p
|-
| 2 Second person
| -ewt'p
| -ewwaq'p
| -ewwaq'p
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| -ug'p
| ?
| ?
|}

For the third person the -''ug'p'' can change to -''ewgp'' for example:

<gl>
\gll Mu alasi-ew-g'p
not go-NEG-SG.PAST
\trans She didn't go
</gl>

== Future Tense ==
First let us compare the affirmative tense for eat:

{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| mijjias
| ?
| mijjit'snen
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
|
| mijjit'snu
|-
| 2 Second person
| mijjit's(g)
| ?
| mijjitoqs'p
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| mijjitew
| ''n/a''
| mijjultitaq
|}
I was not able to elicit dual forms.

We compare the future affirmative with the negated below:

{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| ma mijjiew
| ma mijjiug
| ma mijjiug
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| ma mijjiug
| ma mijjiug
|-
| 2 Second person
| ma mijjiwn
| ?
| ?
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| ma mijjiewg
| ''n/a''
| ma mijjultiewoq
|}
NOTE: In the future the ''mu'' changes to ''ma'' !! Like ''mu'', ''ma'' must always come before the verb conjugated in the negative future.
The correspondent was not able to produce a dual form in the future.

Now here is a paradigm of the negated endings in the future.

{| class="wikitable"
! Negated Future||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| -ew
| -ug
| -ug
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| -ug
| -ug
|-
| 2 Second person
| -iwn
| ?
| ?
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| -ewg
| ''n/a''
| -ultiwoq
|}

As you may have noticed the future tense is easy! The verbs take the same endings as the negated present tense but the ''mu'' is replaced with ''ma'' thus indicating future.

== When negation is used ==

When the verb is negated there must always find a negative particle (like ''mu'' or ''ma''). If not the sentence is ungrammatical as shown below:

<gl>
\gll *gis-wissugwatige-w
can-cook.1-NEG
\trans I cannot cook (intended meaning)
</gl>

The only form of the above sentence must be:

<gl>
\gll ma gis-wissugwatige-w
NEG can-cook.1-NEG
\trans I cannot cook
</gl>

Thus it is seen that ''ma'' comes before the verb, now making the sentence grammatical.

''ma'' always precedes the future tense AND when the ''gis'' prefix is attached to the verb conjugated in the present for example:

<gl>
\gll ma gis-amalga-w-g
NEG can-dance-NEG-3
\trans s/he cannot dance
</gl>

There are some expressions that always take the negative form of the verb such as ''me menga'' (not yet) and ''mowen'' (nobody) that take the negative form of the verb: (examples from [http://www.mikmaqonline.org/ Mi'gmaq Online Dictionary])

<gl>
\gll me menag newt ajetten-u-g
NEG yet one time-NEG-3
\trans it is not one o’clock yet
</gl>

<gl>
\gll mo-wen mijie-w-g
NEG-who eat-NEG-3
\trans no one is eating
</gl>

<gl>
\gll moqwa' goqwei eign-u-g
no thing be-NEG-3
\trans there is nothing there
</gl>

Below is a list of common particles after which the negated form is used. This list is not complete but these are the most common forms.

{| class="wikitable"
! Particle || When used || Translation
|-
| ''mu''
| before negated present and past
| not
|-
| ''mutt''
| before negated imperative
| do not
|-
| ''lpa mu''
| before negated present and past
| not even
|-
| ''mowen''
| before negated present, past and future
| no one/nobody
|-
| ''moqwa' goqwei'''
| before negated present, past and future
| nothing
|-
| ''me menag''
| before negated verb
| not yet
|-
| ''ma''
| before negated future verb and preverb ''gis'' (can)
| not
|-
|}

''moqwa' goqwei'' is also spelled ''mu goqwei'' and a variant of this is ''mu'' + negated verb + ''goqwei'' when used in object position. It is inanimate. As in the following example:

<gl>
\gll mu malqutem-u goqwei
NEG eat.1>0-NEG what
\trans I eat nothing
</gl>

== Negative Concord ==
As can be seen above, Mi'gmaq is a negative concord language. Negative concord is where "double or multiple negative[s] [do] not express an affirmative but a negative" (van der Wouden & Zwarts, 1992). This is similar to French ''Je n'ai vue personne'' 'I have seen nobody' where both the ''ne'' and ''personne'' are both negative but the resulting sentence is negative, rather than each cancelling the other out resulting in a affirmative sentence, i.e. 'I have seen someone'. Mi'gmaq has negation marked in two places with both negative particles, i.e. ''mu'' & ''ma'', and a negative conjugation of the verb, i.e. with ''-u'' or ''-w'' added. Compare examples <glr id="1"/> and <glr id="2"/>.

<gl id="1">
\gll lpa'tuj eigu-p
boy be.there.PST-SG
\trans the boy was there
</gl>

<gl id="2">
\gll lpa'tuj mu eimu-g-u-p
boy NEG be.there-PST-NEG-SG
\trans the boy was not there
</gl>

= Word Order =
The negative particle (or possibly affix) ''mu'' always appears before the verb it negates. Although words can intervene between ''mu'' and the verb it negates, ''mu'' must always precede the verb.

<gl>
\gll Mali mu amal-gag-u-p
Mali NEG dance-PAST-NEG-SG
\trans Mali did not dance
</gl>

<gl>
\gll mu Mali amal-gag-u-p
NEG Mali dance-PAST-NEG-SG
\trans Mali did not dance
</gl>

Placement of ''mu'' post-verbally results in ungrammaticality, as illustrated below.

<gl>
\gll lpa'tuj mu eimug-u-p
boy NEG be.there.PST-NEG-SG
\trans the boy was not there
</gl>

Acceptable word orders:
*mu eimugup lpa'tuj
*mu lpa'tuj eimugup

Unacceptable word orders:
* *eimugup lpa'tuj mu
* *eimugup mu lpa'tuj
* *lpa'tuj eimugup mu

Furthermore, with regards to word order, it appears that negation must come right before the constituent it negates. Here is an example sentence without negation:

<gl>
\gll ula na lpa'tuj ta'n egitgup wigatign
this DEM boy that read.PST book
\trans this is the boy that read the book
</gl>

If we want to negate the first clause, as to say "This is '''not''' the boy that read the book", negation must directly precede 'boy'.

<gl>
\gll ula na mu lpa'tuj ta'n egitgup wigatign
this DEM NEG boy that read.PST book
\trans this is not the boy that read the book
</gl>

The following word orders for negation in the first clause are impossible:
* *ula na lpa'tuj mu...
* *ula mu na lpa'tuj...
* *mu ula na lpa'tuj...

If we want to negate the second clause, as to say "This is the boy that did '''not''' read the book", the word order may be varied, as long as negation comes before the verb (as discussed previously).

== Scope of Negation ==
As stated above, ''mu'' always comes before the verb. There may be particles that intrude between ''mu'' and the negated verb, but as long as ''mu'' comes before the negated verb, the structure is grammatical. [http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED136614.pdf Micmac Grammar, 1976] Sometimes the meaning of the sentence can change depending on the position of ''mu''.

<gl>
\gll egjitm Mali mu amal-gag-u-p
possible Mali NEG dance-PST-NEG-SG
\trans it is true that Mali did not dance
</gl>

<gl>
\gll mu egjitm Mali amal-gag-u-p
NEG possible Mali dance-PST.NEG.SG
\trans it is not true that Mali danced
</gl>

We would also expect phrases with adverb-like particles translatable as "it is possible" or "it is true" or "it is obvious" would also vary regarding negation.

=Language change and negation=
Often I was not able to elicit both the dual and plural forms of a verb. There are many times when I could only elicit the dual form, or times when the dual and plural forms were the same. It has been noted by our consultants that younger speakers are not using the plural forms but are using the dual form to mean both dual and plural. This seems be a language change happening currently in the speech community where the younger generation is leading the change. As noted in the paradigm above for 'eat' in the negated present tense, both dual and plural forms are the same. Here it seems that the plural form is used for both dual and plural meanings. This would strongly suggest a change happening in the speech community.

=References=
Clark, Jeremiah S. "A Dictionary of the Micmac Language." Rand's Micmac Dictionary. Charlottetown, PEI: The Patriot Publishing Company, 1902. Print.

Delisle, Gill L., and Manny L. Metallic. Micmac Teaching Grammar. Ecowi, QC: Thunderbird Press, 1976. Print.

L'Abbe Maillard, M. Grammaire De La Langue Mikmaque. New York: Presse Cramoisy de Jean-Marie Shea, 1864. Print.

Metallic, Janine. "Mi'gmaq Elicitation Session for Field Methods of Linguistics." Ed. Class, Carol Little and LING415. Montreal, QC: n/a, 2011. Print.

Payne, Thomas Edward. Describing Morphosyntax: a Guide for Field Linguists. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge UP, 2008. Print.

Paul-Martin, Patsy. "Mi'kmaq Verb Conjugation." Ed. Orthography, Mi'kmaq Talking Posters Smith/Francis. Truto, NS: Eastern Woodland Print Communications, 2011. Print.

Proulx, Paul. "Proto-Algonquian Verb Inflection." Studies in Native American Languages 15.2 (1990): 100-45. Print.

van der Wouden, Ton, and Frans Zwarts. "Negative Concord." D. Gilbers and S. Looyenga (eds), Language and Cognition 2. Yearbook 1992 Linguistic Theory and Knowledge Representation of the University of Groningen (1992): 317-31. Print.

Negation

2014-08-07T18:26:38Z

Carol: /* Past Tense */

=Introduction=
Negation is the process of turning affirmative statements into the opposite form. For example, the negative equivalent of affirmative sentence, ''I am eating'' is ''I am not eating''. In English there are a few processes at work. ''not'' must always come with an auxiliary verb like the verb 'to have' and 'to be'. In Mi'gmaq, with its extremely detailed and expansive verb conjugations in the present, it is not surprising that the negated conjugation of verbs is just as detailed and expansive as they are in the affirmative.

To start off any commentary on negation, it seems fitting to start of with the word "no" which is ''moqwa'' in Mi'gmaq. (The opposite of this is ''e'e'' , meaning "yes".) Negation in Mi'gmaq is similar to that of Obijwe in that there is both an affix that occurs between the verb and the person marker and a word that comes before the verb denoting negation. See [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ojibwe_grammar#Verbs Verb Conjugation in Ojibwe]. The Mi'gmaq negated affix is ''w'' or ''u'' which is very closely related to the Proto-Algonquian form for negation which is is ''*-w'' ( [http://kuscholarworks.ku.edu/dspace/bitstream/1808/440/1/ling.wp.v15.n2.paper6.pdf Proulx, 1990] ). ''w'' or ''u'' are very closely related phonetically since ''w'' is the semivowel corresponding to the vowel ''u''. Bear in mind that during the elicitation sessions, sometimes it was unsure whether to use ''w'' or ''u''.

Negation in Mi'gmaq consists of adding ''mu'' or ''ma'' then the verb conjugated in the negated verb form. After ''mu'' or ''ma'' the verb must always contain a negative particle. We must think of these two things as inseparable. ''mu'' always comes before the negative conjugated verb in the present or past, and ''ma'' always comes before future or if the prefix ''gis'' ('can', 'to be able to') is attached to the verb. All other prefixes abide by the rules ''mu'' before present or past and ''ma'' before future. There are other particles that take the negated form of the verb, but it is obvious that these particles express a negated idea.

Please note as well that in some of the studies on Mi'gmaq and Algonquian languages the term 'nonaffirmative' is used to describe the negated form. For consistency in this report, I will use the term 'negated' to indicate the form of the verb which is the opposite of affirmative. 'Nonaffirmative' and 'negated' however refer to the same process of negation.

= Conjugation of the Negated Verb =
I have selected the verb ''mijji'' (to eat). Please note that some resources spell this like ''mijji'' where other spell it ''miji'' ([http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED136614.pdf Micmac Teaching Grammar, 1976]). I have selected the spelling from [http://www.mikmaqonline.org/servlet/dictionaryFrameSet.html?arg0=mijjit&method=searchFromMikmaq the Migmaq talking dictionary]. It is also important to note that the Micmac Teaching Grammar uses an orthography that is different of all other orthographies used with Mi'gmaq. I will indicate which terms they are and give the Listuguj equivalent orthographical manner of writing them.

The simplified formula for the conjugation in the negated form: the base form + ''u'' or ''w'' + person ending ([http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED136614.pdf Micmac Teaching Grammar, 1976])
The base form for intransitive verbs is always the verb in the first person singular. For example I eat is ''mijji''. Now to create the second person singular we add the ending -''n'' denoting second person singular and get the form ''mijjin''. For another type of verb (henceforth referred to as the ''a'' verbs) we take the base form ''amalga-'' and add -''n'' to get ''amalgan'' (you dance) and to get the first person singular we add -''i''. Please note that it has been hypothesized that there are at least eleven different conjugations. We will only be dealing with a couple here. Because of reasons of time limitation, I was not able to elicit all eleven types but when there is a difference in conjugation, that will be noted. Note that in the plural the ''u'' or ''w'' comes after ''-ulti-''. This could be due the the fact that ''-ulti-'' is the plural affix that attaches to the base form of the verb and does not convey anything about the tense of the verb, rather it is used to denote that the verb is plural. Thus the ''u'' or ''w'' comes right before the tense marker which is always at the end of the verb. For the first person singular in present there is a null tense marker at the end of some verbs (for example the ''-i'' verbs) thus the negative marker is at the end.

== Present Tense ==
First is a comparison of the affirmative and negated paradigms of the verb ''mijji'' ('eat').

{| class="wikitable"
|+ mijji- 'eat'
|-
! scope="col" colspan="2"| ↓person / number→
! scope="col" | SG
! scope="col" | DU
! scope="col" | PL
|-
! scope="row" rowspan="2"| 1
! scope="row"| 13
| rowspan="2" | mijji
|mijjieg
|mijjultieg
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| mijji'gw
| mijjulti'gw
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2" | 2
| mijjin
| mijjioq
| mijjultioq
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2"| 3
| mijjit
| mijjijig
| mijjultijig
|-
|}

{| class="wikitable"
|+ mu mijji- 'not eat'
|-
! scope="col" colspan="2"| ↓person / number→
! scope="col" | SG
! scope="col" | DU
! scope="col" | PL
|-
! scope="row" rowspan="2"| 1
! scope="row"| 13
| rowspan="2" | mu mijjiw
| mu mijjiweg
| mu mijjultiweg
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| mu mijjigw
| mu mijjultigw
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2" | 2
| mu mijjiun
| mu mijjiwoq
| mu mijjultiwoq
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2"| 3
| mu mijjigw
| mu mijji'gw
| mu mijjulti'gw
|-
|}

The word ''mu'' signifies negation. When ''mu'' is in front of the verb, the verb must also be conjugated in the negative form. In the above table we see the intrusion of the sound ''u'', ''ew'' or ''w''. The following table illustrates the endings for the present negative tense, keeping in mind ''mu'' must ALWAYS come right before the negated verb. When ''mu'' precedes a verb it must ALWAYS be in the negated form.

Below is a table that summarizes the VAI -i stem negative person endings in present conjugation. Inanimate [IN] conjugation was taken from the Micmac Grammar (1976, pg 155).

{| class="wikitable"
|+ VAI -i stem negative present person endings
|-
! scope="col" colspan="2"| ↓person / number→
! scope="col" | SG
! scope="col" | DU
! scope="col" | PL
|-
! scope="row" rowspan="2"| 1
! scope="row"| 13
| rowspan="2" |-u
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2" | 2
| -
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2"| 3.AN
| -
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2"| 3.IN
| -
| -
| -
|-
|}

The forms for the first person dual and plural in the exclusive and inclusive forms are the same. As shown by other data, the dual form seems to be in the process of disappearing. This is one such example where the dual form does not exist for the plural first person. Some younger speakers do not use the dual form at all so it is not surprising that we find a gap in the dual form here. All this is according to the speaker but if we followed the pattern of the previous forms we would expect the dual form for the inclusive and exclusive first person to be ''-ieweg''. "When the verb is negated, then the -g third person is ALWAYS found" (Micmac Grammar, 1976 pg 93).

Below is a comparison of different verbs to give an idea of how to conjugate different types of verbs in the negated form. All forms are conjugated in the present singular third person animate. The form of -''elie-'' was taken from Micmac Grammar (pg 155). For more detail about these forms see [[VAI]].

{| class="wikitable"
! VAI stem || Base Form || Gloss || Affirmative || Gloss || Negated || Gloss
|-
| -i
| mijji-
| eat
| mijjit
| s/he eats
| mu mijjigw
| s/he does not eat
|-
| -a
| amalga-
| dance
| amalgat
| s/he dances
| mu amalgagw
| s/he does not dance
|-
| -a'si
| ala'si-
| go around
| ala'sit
| s/he goes around
| mu ala'sigw
| s/he does not go around
|-
| -e
| elie-
| go
| eliet
| s/he goes
| mu eliegw
| s/he does not go
|-
|}

For verb conjugations in the affirmative please see [http://firstnationhelp.com/ali/posters/pdf/verb_conjugation.pdf Mi'kmaq Verb Conjugation]. As you can see, this site uses the verb ''mijisi'' meaning 'to eat'. In Listuguj this is not used as the word for to eat because it sounds too close for the verb ''mejisi'' 'to excrete'.

=== Transitive ===
Below is the conjugation in present of a transitive verb that takes an inanimate object.

{| class="wikitable" style="text-align:center"
|+ VTI Conjugation Class 1: -m class
|-
! scope="col" | ↓subject / object→
! scope="col" | 0SG
! scope="col" | 0PL
|-
! scope="row" | 1
| malqutm
| malqutmann
|-
! scope="row" | 13
| malqutmeg
| malqutmegl
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| malqutmu'g
| malqutmu'gul
|-
! scope="row" | 2
| malqutmn
| malqutmnn
|-
! scope="row" | 2PL
| malqutmoq
| malqutmoqol
|-
! scope="row" | 3
| malqutmeg
| malqutmegl
|-
! scope="row" | 3PL
| malqutmi'tij
| malqutmi'titl
|}

{| class="wikitable" style="text-align:center"
|+ VTI Negative Conjugation Class 1: -m class
|-
! scope="col" | ↓subject / object→
! scope="col" | 0SG
! scope="col" | 0PL
|-
! scope="row" | 1
| mu malqutmu
| mu malqutmuann
|-
! scope="row" | 13
| mu malqutmueg
| mu malqutmuegl
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| mu malqutmugg
| mu malqutmuggul
|-
! scope="row" | 2
| mu malqutmu'n
| mu malqutmu'nn
|-
! scope="row" | 2PL
| mu malqutmuoq
| mu malqutmuoqol
|-
! scope="row" | 3
| mu malqutmug
| mu malqutmugul
|-
! scope="row" | 3PL
| mu malqutmi'tigw
| mu malqutmi'tigul
|-
|}

{| class="wikitable" style="text-align:center"
|+ VTI Negative Conjugation Class 1: -m class
|-
! scope="col" | ↓subject / object→
! scope="col" | 0SG
! scope="col" | 0PL
|-
! scope="row" | 1
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 13
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 12
|
|
|-
! scope="row" | 2
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 2PL
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 3
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 3PL
| -
| -
|-
|}

== Imperative ==
Here is the formation of the affirmative imperative:
{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijji-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 2 Second person
| mijji
| mijjigw
| mijjultigw
|-
|}

Now we compare it to the negated:
{| class="wikitable"
! ''mutt mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 2 Second person
| mutt mijjiw
| mutt mijjinew
| mutt mijjultinew
|-
|}

== Past Tense ==
Again for the past we compare the past and the negated past.

{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| mijjiap
| mijjieg'p
| mijjultieg'p
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| mijji'gup
| mijjulti'gup
|-
| 2 Second person
| mijjit'p
| mijjioqop
| mijjultioqop
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| mijjip
| mijjipni'g
| mijjultipni'g
|}

Now let us look at the negated forms.

{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| mu mijjiewap
| mu mijjiewg'p
| mu mijjiewg'p
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| mu mijjiewg'p
| mu mijjiewg'p
|-
| 2 Second person
| mu mijjiewt'p
| mu mijjiewwaq'p
| mu mijjiewwaq'p
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| mu mijjug'p
| ?
| ?
|}

Thus this would be the conjugation of the negated form:

{| class="wikitable"
! Negated Past||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| -ewap
| -ewg'p
| -ewg'p
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| -ewg'p
| -ewg'p
|-
| 2 Second person
| -ewt'p
| -ewwaq'p
| -ewwaq'p
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| -ug'p
| ?
| ?
|}

For the third person the -''ug'p'' can change to -''ewgp'' for example:

<gl>
\gll Mu alasi-ew-g'p
not go-NEG-SG.PAST
\trans She didn't go
</gl>

== Future Tense ==
First let us compare the affirmative tense for eat:

{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| mijjias
| ?
| mijjit'snen
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
|
| mijjit'snu
|-
| 2 Second person
| mijjit's(g)
| ?
| mijjitoqs'p
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| mijjitew
| ''n/a''
| mijjultitaq
|}
I was not able to elicit dual forms.

We compare the future affirmative with the negated below:

{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| ma mijjiew
| ma mijjiug
| ma mijjiug
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| ma mijjiug
| ma mijjiug
|-
| 2 Second person
| ma mijjiwn
| ?
| ?
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| ma mijjiewg
| ''n/a''
| ma mijjultiewoq
|}
NOTE: In the future the ''mu'' changes to ''ma'' !! Like ''mu'', ''ma'' must always come before the verb conjugated in the negative future.
The correspondent was not able to produce a dual form in the future.

Now here is a paradigm of the negated endings in the future.

{| class="wikitable"
! Negated Future||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| -ew
| -ug
| -ug
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| -ug
| -ug
|-
| 2 Second person
| -iwn
| ?
| ?
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| -ewg
| ''n/a''
| -ultiwoq
|}

As you may have noticed the future tense is easy! The verbs take the same endings as the negated present tense but the ''mu'' is replaced with ''ma'' thus indicating future.

== When negation is used ==

When the verb is negated there must always find a negative particle (like ''mu'' or ''ma''). If not the sentence is ungrammatical as shown below:

<gl>
\gll *gis-wissugwatige-w
can-cook.1-NEG
\trans I cannot cook (intended meaning)
</gl>

The only form of the above sentence must be:

<gl>
\gll ma gis-wissugwatige-w
NEG can-cook.1-NEG
\trans I cannot cook
</gl>

Thus it is seen that ''ma'' comes before the verb, now making the sentence grammatical.

''ma'' always precedes the future tense AND when the ''gis'' prefix is attached to the verb conjugated in the present for example:

<gl>
\gll ma gis-amalga-w-g
NEG can-dance-NEG-3
\trans s/he cannot dance
</gl>

There are some expressions that always take the negative form of the verb such as ''me menga'' (not yet) and ''mowen'' (nobody) that take the negative form of the verb: (examples from [http://www.mikmaqonline.org/ Mi'gmaq Online Dictionary])

<gl>
\gll me menag newt ajetten-u-g
NEG yet one time-NEG-3
\trans it is not one o’clock yet
</gl>

<gl>
\gll mo-wen mijie-w-g
NEG-who eat-NEG-3
\trans no one is eating
</gl>

<gl>
\gll moqwa' goqwei eign-u-g
no thing be-NEG-3
\trans there is nothing there
</gl>

Below is a list of common particles after which the negated form is used. This list is not complete but these are the most common forms.

{| class="wikitable"
! Particle || When used || Translation
|-
| ''mu''
| before negated present and past
| not
|-
| ''mutt''
| before negated imperative
| do not
|-
| ''lpa mu''
| before negated present and past
| not even
|-
| ''mowen''
| before negated present, past and future
| no one/nobody
|-
| ''moqwa' goqwei'''
| before negated present, past and future
| nothing
|-
| ''me menag''
| before negated verb
| not yet
|-
| ''ma''
| before negated future verb and preverb ''gis'' (can)
| not
|-
|}

''moqwa' goqwei'' is also spelled ''mu goqwei'' and a variant of this is ''mu'' + negated verb + ''goqwei'' when used in object position. It is inanimate. As in the following example:

<gl>
\gll mu malqutem-u goqwei
NEG eat.1>0-NEG what
\trans I eat nothing
</gl>

== Negative Concord ==
As can be seen above, Mi'gmaq is a negative concord language. Negative concord is where "double or multiple negative[s] [do] not express an affirmative but a negative" (van der Wouden & Zwarts, 1992). This is similar to French ''Je n'ai vue personne'' 'I have seen nobody' where both the ''ne'' and ''personne'' are both negative but the resulting sentence is negative, rather than each cancelling the other out resulting in a affirmative sentence, i.e. 'I have seen someone'. Mi'gmaq has negation marked in two places with both negative particles, i.e. ''mu'' & ''ma'', and a negative conjugation of the verb, i.e. with ''-u'' or ''-w'' added. Compare examples <glr id="1"/> and <glr id="2"/>.

<gl id="1">
\gll lpa'tuj eigu-p
boy be.there.PST-SG
\trans the boy was there
</gl>

<gl id="2">
\gll lpa'tuj mu eimu-g-u-p
boy NEG be.there-PST-NEG-SG
\trans the boy was not there
</gl>

= Word Order =
The negative particle (or possibly affix) ''mu'' always appears before the verb it negates. Although words can intervene between ''mu'' and the verb it negates, ''mu'' must always precede the verb.

<gl>
\gll Mali mu amal-gag-u-p
Mali NEG dance-PAST-NEG-SG
\trans Mali did not dance
</gl>

<gl>
\gll mu Mali amal-gag-u-p
NEG Mali dance-PAST-NEG-SG
\trans Mali did not dance
</gl>

Placement of ''mu'' post-verbally results in ungrammaticality, as illustrated below.

<gl>
\gll lpa'tuj mu eimug-u-p
boy NEG be.there.PST-NEG-SG
\trans the boy was not there
</gl>

Acceptable word orders:
*mu eimugup lpa'tuj
*mu lpa'tuj eimugup

Unacceptable word orders:
* *eimugup lpa'tuj mu
* *eimugup mu lpa'tuj
* *lpa'tuj eimugup mu

Furthermore, with regards to word order, it appears that negation must come right before the constituent it negates. Here is an example sentence without negation:

<gl>
\gll ula na lpa'tuj ta'n egitgup wigatign
this DEM boy that read.PST book
\trans this is the boy that read the book
</gl>

If we want to negate the first clause, as to say "This is '''not''' the boy that read the book", negation must directly precede 'boy'.

<gl>
\gll ula na mu lpa'tuj ta'n egitgup wigatign
this DEM NEG boy that read.PST book
\trans this is not the boy that read the book
</gl>

The following word orders for negation in the first clause are impossible:
* *ula na lpa'tuj mu...
* *ula mu na lpa'tuj...
* *mu ula na lpa'tuj...

If we want to negate the second clause, as to say "This is the boy that did '''not''' read the book", the word order may be varied, as long as negation comes before the verb (as discussed previously).

== Scope of Negation ==
As stated above, ''mu'' always comes before the verb. There may be particles that intrude between ''mu'' and the negated verb, but as long as ''mu'' comes before the negated verb, the structure is grammatical. [http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED136614.pdf Micmac Grammar, 1976] Sometimes the meaning of the sentence can change depending on the position of ''mu''.

<gl>
\gll egjitm Mali mu amal-gag-u-p
possible Mali NEG dance-PST-NEG-SG
\trans it is true that Mali did not dance
</gl>

<gl>
\gll mu egjitm Mali amal-gag-u-p
NEG possible Mali dance-PST.NEG.SG
\trans it is not true that Mali danced
</gl>

We would also expect phrases with adverb-like particles translatable as "it is possible" or "it is true" or "it is obvious" would also vary regarding negation.

=Language change and negation=
Often I was not able to elicit both the dual and plural forms of a verb. There are many times when I could only elicit the dual form, or times when the dual and plural forms were the same. It has been noted by our consultants that younger speakers are not using the plural forms but are using the dual form to mean both dual and plural. This seems be a language change happening currently in the speech community where the younger generation is leading the change. As noted in the paradigm above for 'eat' in the negated present tense, both dual and plural forms are the same. Here it seems that the plural form is used for both dual and plural meanings. This would strongly suggest a change happening in the speech community.

=References=
Clark, Jeremiah S. "A Dictionary of the Micmac Language." Rand's Micmac Dictionary. Charlottetown, PEI: The Patriot Publishing Company, 1902. Print.

Delisle, Gill L., and Manny L. Metallic. Micmac Teaching Grammar. Ecowi, QC: Thunderbird Press, 1976. Print.

L'Abbe Maillard, M. Grammaire De La Langue Mikmaque. New York: Presse Cramoisy de Jean-Marie Shea, 1864. Print.

Metallic, Janine. "Mi'gmaq Elicitation Session for Field Methods of Linguistics." Ed. Class, Carol Little and LING415. Montreal, QC: n/a, 2011. Print.

Payne, Thomas Edward. Describing Morphosyntax: a Guide for Field Linguists. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge UP, 2008. Print.

Paul-Martin, Patsy. "Mi'kmaq Verb Conjugation." Ed. Orthography, Mi'kmaq Talking Posters Smith/Francis. Truto, NS: Eastern Woodland Print Communications, 2011. Print.

Proulx, Paul. "Proto-Algonquian Verb Inflection." Studies in Native American Languages 15.2 (1990): 100-45. Print.

van der Wouden, Ton, and Frans Zwarts. "Negative Concord." D. Gilbers and S. Looyenga (eds), Language and Cognition 2. Yearbook 1992 Linguistic Theory and Knowledge Representation of the University of Groningen (1992): 317-31. Print.

Negation

2014-08-07T18:24:22Z

Carol: /* Present Tense */

=Introduction=
Negation is the process of turning affirmative statements into the opposite form. For example, the negative equivalent of affirmative sentence, ''I am eating'' is ''I am not eating''. In English there are a few processes at work. ''not'' must always come with an auxiliary verb like the verb 'to have' and 'to be'. In Mi'gmaq, with its extremely detailed and expansive verb conjugations in the present, it is not surprising that the negated conjugation of verbs is just as detailed and expansive as they are in the affirmative.

To start off any commentary on negation, it seems fitting to start of with the word "no" which is ''moqwa'' in Mi'gmaq. (The opposite of this is ''e'e'' , meaning "yes".) Negation in Mi'gmaq is similar to that of Obijwe in that there is both an affix that occurs between the verb and the person marker and a word that comes before the verb denoting negation. See [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ojibwe_grammar#Verbs Verb Conjugation in Ojibwe]. The Mi'gmaq negated affix is ''w'' or ''u'' which is very closely related to the Proto-Algonquian form for negation which is is ''*-w'' ( [http://kuscholarworks.ku.edu/dspace/bitstream/1808/440/1/ling.wp.v15.n2.paper6.pdf Proulx, 1990] ). ''w'' or ''u'' are very closely related phonetically since ''w'' is the semivowel corresponding to the vowel ''u''. Bear in mind that during the elicitation sessions, sometimes it was unsure whether to use ''w'' or ''u''.

Negation in Mi'gmaq consists of adding ''mu'' or ''ma'' then the verb conjugated in the negated verb form. After ''mu'' or ''ma'' the verb must always contain a negative particle. We must think of these two things as inseparable. ''mu'' always comes before the negative conjugated verb in the present or past, and ''ma'' always comes before future or if the prefix ''gis'' ('can', 'to be able to') is attached to the verb. All other prefixes abide by the rules ''mu'' before present or past and ''ma'' before future. There are other particles that take the negated form of the verb, but it is obvious that these particles express a negated idea.

Please note as well that in some of the studies on Mi'gmaq and Algonquian languages the term 'nonaffirmative' is used to describe the negated form. For consistency in this report, I will use the term 'negated' to indicate the form of the verb which is the opposite of affirmative. 'Nonaffirmative' and 'negated' however refer to the same process of negation.

= Conjugation of the Negated Verb =
I have selected the verb ''mijji'' (to eat). Please note that some resources spell this like ''mijji'' where other spell it ''miji'' ([http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED136614.pdf Micmac Teaching Grammar, 1976]). I have selected the spelling from [http://www.mikmaqonline.org/servlet/dictionaryFrameSet.html?arg0=mijjit&method=searchFromMikmaq the Migmaq talking dictionary]. It is also important to note that the Micmac Teaching Grammar uses an orthography that is different of all other orthographies used with Mi'gmaq. I will indicate which terms they are and give the Listuguj equivalent orthographical manner of writing them.

The simplified formula for the conjugation in the negated form: the base form + ''u'' or ''w'' + person ending ([http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED136614.pdf Micmac Teaching Grammar, 1976])
The base form for intransitive verbs is always the verb in the first person singular. For example I eat is ''mijji''. Now to create the second person singular we add the ending -''n'' denoting second person singular and get the form ''mijjin''. For another type of verb (henceforth referred to as the ''a'' verbs) we take the base form ''amalga-'' and add -''n'' to get ''amalgan'' (you dance) and to get the first person singular we add -''i''. Please note that it has been hypothesized that there are at least eleven different conjugations. We will only be dealing with a couple here. Because of reasons of time limitation, I was not able to elicit all eleven types but when there is a difference in conjugation, that will be noted. Note that in the plural the ''u'' or ''w'' comes after ''-ulti-''. This could be due the the fact that ''-ulti-'' is the plural affix that attaches to the base form of the verb and does not convey anything about the tense of the verb, rather it is used to denote that the verb is plural. Thus the ''u'' or ''w'' comes right before the tense marker which is always at the end of the verb. For the first person singular in present there is a null tense marker at the end of some verbs (for example the ''-i'' verbs) thus the negative marker is at the end.

== Present Tense ==
First is a comparison of the affirmative and negated paradigms of the verb ''mijji'' ('eat').

{| class="wikitable"
|+ mijji- 'eat'
|-
! scope="col" colspan="2"| ↓person / number→
! scope="col" | SG
! scope="col" | DU
! scope="col" | PL
|-
! scope="row" rowspan="2"| 1
! scope="row"| 13
| rowspan="2" | mijji
|mijjieg
|mijjultieg
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| mijji'gw
| mijjulti'gw
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2" | 2
| mijjin
| mijjioq
| mijjultioq
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2"| 3
| mijjit
| mijjijig
| mijjultijig
|-
|}

{| class="wikitable"
|+ mu mijji- 'not eat'
|-
! scope="col" colspan="2"| ↓person / number→
! scope="col" | SG
! scope="col" | DU
! scope="col" | PL
|-
! scope="row" rowspan="2"| 1
! scope="row"| 13
| rowspan="2" | mu mijjiw
| mu mijjiweg
| mu mijjultiweg
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| mu mijjigw
| mu mijjultigw
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2" | 2
| mu mijjiun
| mu mijjiwoq
| mu mijjultiwoq
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2"| 3
| mu mijjigw
| mu mijji'gw
| mu mijjulti'gw
|-
|}

The word ''mu'' signifies negation. When ''mu'' is in front of the verb, the verb must also be conjugated in the negative form. In the above table we see the intrusion of the sound ''u'', ''ew'' or ''w''. The following table illustrates the endings for the present negative tense, keeping in mind ''mu'' must ALWAYS come right before the negated verb. When ''mu'' precedes a verb it must ALWAYS be in the negated form.

Below is a table that summarizes the VAI -i stem negative person endings in present conjugation. Inanimate [IN] conjugation was taken from the Micmac Grammar (1976, pg 155).

{| class="wikitable"
|+ VAI -i stem negative present person endings
|-
! scope="col" colspan="2"| ↓person / number→
! scope="col" | SG
! scope="col" | DU
! scope="col" | PL
|-
! scope="row" rowspan="2"| 1
! scope="row"| 13
| rowspan="2" |-u
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2" | 2
| -
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2"| 3.AN
| -
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2"| 3.IN
| -
| -
| -
|-
|}

The forms for the first person dual and plural in the exclusive and inclusive forms are the same. As shown by other data, the dual form seems to be in the process of disappearing. This is one such example where the dual form does not exist for the plural first person. Some younger speakers do not use the dual form at all so it is not surprising that we find a gap in the dual form here. All this is according to the speaker but if we followed the pattern of the previous forms we would expect the dual form for the inclusive and exclusive first person to be ''-ieweg''. "When the verb is negated, then the -g third person is ALWAYS found" (Micmac Grammar, 1976 pg 93).

Below is a comparison of different verbs to give an idea of how to conjugate different types of verbs in the negated form. All forms are conjugated in the present singular third person animate. The form of -''elie-'' was taken from Micmac Grammar (pg 155). For more detail about these forms see [[VAI]].

{| class="wikitable"
! VAI stem || Base Form || Gloss || Affirmative || Gloss || Negated || Gloss
|-
| -i
| mijji-
| eat
| mijjit
| s/he eats
| mu mijjigw
| s/he does not eat
|-
| -a
| amalga-
| dance
| amalgat
| s/he dances
| mu amalgagw
| s/he does not dance
|-
| -a'si
| ala'si-
| go around
| ala'sit
| s/he goes around
| mu ala'sigw
| s/he does not go around
|-
| -e
| elie-
| go
| eliet
| s/he goes
| mu eliegw
| s/he does not go
|-
|}

For verb conjugations in the affirmative please see [http://firstnationhelp.com/ali/posters/pdf/verb_conjugation.pdf Mi'kmaq Verb Conjugation]. As you can see, this site uses the verb ''mijisi'' meaning 'to eat'. In Listuguj this is not used as the word for to eat because it sounds too close for the verb ''mejisi'' 'to excrete'.

=== Transitive ===
Below is the conjugation in present of a transitive verb that takes an inanimate object.

{| class="wikitable" style="text-align:center"
|+ VTI Conjugation Class 1: -m class
|-
! scope="col" | ↓subject / object→
! scope="col" | 0SG
! scope="col" | 0PL
|-
! scope="row" | 1
| malqutm
| malqutmann
|-
! scope="row" | 13
| malqutmeg
| malqutmegl
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| malqutmu'g
| malqutmu'gul
|-
! scope="row" | 2
| malqutmn
| malqutmnn
|-
! scope="row" | 2PL
| malqutmoq
| malqutmoqol
|-
! scope="row" | 3
| malqutmeg
| malqutmegl
|-
! scope="row" | 3PL
| malqutmi'tij
| malqutmi'titl
|}

{| class="wikitable" style="text-align:center"
|+ VTI Negative Conjugation Class 1: -m class
|-
! scope="col" | ↓subject / object→
! scope="col" | 0SG
! scope="col" | 0PL
|-
! scope="row" | 1
| mu malqutmu
| mu malqutmuann
|-
! scope="row" | 13
| mu malqutmueg
| mu malqutmuegl
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| mu malqutmugg
| mu malqutmuggul
|-
! scope="row" | 2
| mu malqutmu'n
| mu malqutmu'nn
|-
! scope="row" | 2PL
| mu malqutmuoq
| mu malqutmuoqol
|-
! scope="row" | 3
| mu malqutmug
| mu malqutmugul
|-
! scope="row" | 3PL
| mu malqutmi'tigw
| mu malqutmi'tigul
|-
|}

{| class="wikitable" style="text-align:center"
|+ VTI Negative Conjugation Class 1: -m class
|-
! scope="col" | ↓subject / object→
! scope="col" | 0SG
! scope="col" | 0PL
|-
! scope="row" | 1
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 13
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 12
|
|
|-
! scope="row" | 2
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 2PL
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 3
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 3PL
| -
| -
|-
|}

== Imperative ==
Here is the formation of the affirmative imperative:
{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijji-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 2 Second person
| mijji
| mijjigw
| mijjultigw
|-
|}

Now we compare it to the negated:
{| class="wikitable"
! ''mutt mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 2 Second person
| mutt mijjiw
| mutt mijjinew
| mutt mijjultinew
|-
|}

== Past Tense ==
Again for the past we compare the past and the negated past.

{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| mijjiap
| mijjieg'p
| mijjultieg'p
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| mijjiewg'p
| mijjultiewg'p
|-
| 2 Second person
| mijjit'p
| mijjiqop
| mijjultioqop
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| mijjip
| mijjpni'g
| mijjultpni'g
|}

Now let us look at the negated forms.

{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| mu mijjiewap
| mu mijjiewg'p
| mu mijjiewg'p
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| mu mijjiewg'p
| mu mijjiewg'p
|-
| 2 Second person
| mu mijjiewt'p
| mu mijjiewwaq'p
| mu mijjiewwaq'p
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| mu mijjug'p
| ?
| ?
|}

Thus this would be the conjugation of the negated form:

{| class="wikitable"
! Negated Past||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| -ewap
| -ewg'p
| -ewg'p
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| -ewg'p
| -ewg'p
|-
| 2 Second person
| -ewt'p
| -ewwaq'p
| -ewwaq'p
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| -ug'p
| ?
| ?
|}

For the third person the -''ug'p'' can change to -''ewgp'' for example:

<gl>
\gll Mu alasi-ew-g'p
not go-NEG-SG.PAST
\trans She didn't go
</gl>

== Future Tense ==
First let us compare the affirmative tense for eat:

{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| mijjias
| ?
| mijjit'snen
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
|
| mijjit'snu
|-
| 2 Second person
| mijjit's(g)
| ?
| mijjitoqs'p
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| mijjitew
| ''n/a''
| mijjultitaq
|}
I was not able to elicit dual forms.

We compare the future affirmative with the negated below:

{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| ma mijjiew
| ma mijjiug
| ma mijjiug
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| ma mijjiug
| ma mijjiug
|-
| 2 Second person
| ma mijjiwn
| ?
| ?
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| ma mijjiewg
| ''n/a''
| ma mijjultiewoq
|}
NOTE: In the future the ''mu'' changes to ''ma'' !! Like ''mu'', ''ma'' must always come before the verb conjugated in the negative future.
The correspondent was not able to produce a dual form in the future.

Now here is a paradigm of the negated endings in the future.

{| class="wikitable"
! Negated Future||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| -ew
| -ug
| -ug
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| -ug
| -ug
|-
| 2 Second person
| -iwn
| ?
| ?
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| -ewg
| ''n/a''
| -ultiwoq
|}

As you may have noticed the future tense is easy! The verbs take the same endings as the negated present tense but the ''mu'' is replaced with ''ma'' thus indicating future.

== When negation is used ==

When the verb is negated there must always find a negative particle (like ''mu'' or ''ma''). If not the sentence is ungrammatical as shown below:

<gl>
\gll *gis-wissugwatige-w
can-cook.1-NEG
\trans I cannot cook (intended meaning)
</gl>

The only form of the above sentence must be:

<gl>
\gll ma gis-wissugwatige-w
NEG can-cook.1-NEG
\trans I cannot cook
</gl>

Thus it is seen that ''ma'' comes before the verb, now making the sentence grammatical.

''ma'' always precedes the future tense AND when the ''gis'' prefix is attached to the verb conjugated in the present for example:

<gl>
\gll ma gis-amalga-w-g
NEG can-dance-NEG-3
\trans s/he cannot dance
</gl>

There are some expressions that always take the negative form of the verb such as ''me menga'' (not yet) and ''mowen'' (nobody) that take the negative form of the verb: (examples from [http://www.mikmaqonline.org/ Mi'gmaq Online Dictionary])

<gl>
\gll me menag newt ajetten-u-g
NEG yet one time-NEG-3
\trans it is not one o’clock yet
</gl>

<gl>
\gll mo-wen mijie-w-g
NEG-who eat-NEG-3
\trans no one is eating
</gl>

<gl>
\gll moqwa' goqwei eign-u-g
no thing be-NEG-3
\trans there is nothing there
</gl>

Below is a list of common particles after which the negated form is used. This list is not complete but these are the most common forms.

{| class="wikitable"
! Particle || When used || Translation
|-
| ''mu''
| before negated present and past
| not
|-
| ''mutt''
| before negated imperative
| do not
|-
| ''lpa mu''
| before negated present and past
| not even
|-
| ''mowen''
| before negated present, past and future
| no one/nobody
|-
| ''moqwa' goqwei'''
| before negated present, past and future
| nothing
|-
| ''me menag''
| before negated verb
| not yet
|-
| ''ma''
| before negated future verb and preverb ''gis'' (can)
| not
|-
|}

''moqwa' goqwei'' is also spelled ''mu goqwei'' and a variant of this is ''mu'' + negated verb + ''goqwei'' when used in object position. It is inanimate. As in the following example:

<gl>
\gll mu malqutem-u goqwei
NEG eat.1>0-NEG what
\trans I eat nothing
</gl>

== Negative Concord ==
As can be seen above, Mi'gmaq is a negative concord language. Negative concord is where "double or multiple negative[s] [do] not express an affirmative but a negative" (van der Wouden & Zwarts, 1992). This is similar to French ''Je n'ai vue personne'' 'I have seen nobody' where both the ''ne'' and ''personne'' are both negative but the resulting sentence is negative, rather than each cancelling the other out resulting in a affirmative sentence, i.e. 'I have seen someone'. Mi'gmaq has negation marked in two places with both negative particles, i.e. ''mu'' & ''ma'', and a negative conjugation of the verb, i.e. with ''-u'' or ''-w'' added. Compare examples <glr id="1"/> and <glr id="2"/>.

<gl id="1">
\gll lpa'tuj eigu-p
boy be.there.PST-SG
\trans the boy was there
</gl>

<gl id="2">
\gll lpa'tuj mu eimu-g-u-p
boy NEG be.there-PST-NEG-SG
\trans the boy was not there
</gl>

= Word Order =
The negative particle (or possibly affix) ''mu'' always appears before the verb it negates. Although words can intervene between ''mu'' and the verb it negates, ''mu'' must always precede the verb.

<gl>
\gll Mali mu amal-gag-u-p
Mali NEG dance-PAST-NEG-SG
\trans Mali did not dance
</gl>

<gl>
\gll mu Mali amal-gag-u-p
NEG Mali dance-PAST-NEG-SG
\trans Mali did not dance
</gl>

Placement of ''mu'' post-verbally results in ungrammaticality, as illustrated below.

<gl>
\gll lpa'tuj mu eimug-u-p
boy NEG be.there.PST-NEG-SG
\trans the boy was not there
</gl>

Acceptable word orders:
*mu eimugup lpa'tuj
*mu lpa'tuj eimugup

Unacceptable word orders:
* *eimugup lpa'tuj mu
* *eimugup mu lpa'tuj
* *lpa'tuj eimugup mu

Furthermore, with regards to word order, it appears that negation must come right before the constituent it negates. Here is an example sentence without negation:

<gl>
\gll ula na lpa'tuj ta'n egitgup wigatign
this DEM boy that read.PST book
\trans this is the boy that read the book
</gl>

If we want to negate the first clause, as to say "This is '''not''' the boy that read the book", negation must directly precede 'boy'.

<gl>
\gll ula na mu lpa'tuj ta'n egitgup wigatign
this DEM NEG boy that read.PST book
\trans this is not the boy that read the book
</gl>

The following word orders for negation in the first clause are impossible:
* *ula na lpa'tuj mu...
* *ula mu na lpa'tuj...
* *mu ula na lpa'tuj...

If we want to negate the second clause, as to say "This is the boy that did '''not''' read the book", the word order may be varied, as long as negation comes before the verb (as discussed previously).

== Scope of Negation ==
As stated above, ''mu'' always comes before the verb. There may be particles that intrude between ''mu'' and the negated verb, but as long as ''mu'' comes before the negated verb, the structure is grammatical. [http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED136614.pdf Micmac Grammar, 1976] Sometimes the meaning of the sentence can change depending on the position of ''mu''.

<gl>
\gll egjitm Mali mu amal-gag-u-p
possible Mali NEG dance-PST-NEG-SG
\trans it is true that Mali did not dance
</gl>

<gl>
\gll mu egjitm Mali amal-gag-u-p
NEG possible Mali dance-PST.NEG.SG
\trans it is not true that Mali danced
</gl>

We would also expect phrases with adverb-like particles translatable as "it is possible" or "it is true" or "it is obvious" would also vary regarding negation.

=Language change and negation=
Often I was not able to elicit both the dual and plural forms of a verb. There are many times when I could only elicit the dual form, or times when the dual and plural forms were the same. It has been noted by our consultants that younger speakers are not using the plural forms but are using the dual form to mean both dual and plural. This seems be a language change happening currently in the speech community where the younger generation is leading the change. As noted in the paradigm above for 'eat' in the negated present tense, both dual and plural forms are the same. Here it seems that the plural form is used for both dual and plural meanings. This would strongly suggest a change happening in the speech community.

=References=
Clark, Jeremiah S. "A Dictionary of the Micmac Language." Rand's Micmac Dictionary. Charlottetown, PEI: The Patriot Publishing Company, 1902. Print.

Delisle, Gill L., and Manny L. Metallic. Micmac Teaching Grammar. Ecowi, QC: Thunderbird Press, 1976. Print.

L'Abbe Maillard, M. Grammaire De La Langue Mikmaque. New York: Presse Cramoisy de Jean-Marie Shea, 1864. Print.

Metallic, Janine. "Mi'gmaq Elicitation Session for Field Methods of Linguistics." Ed. Class, Carol Little and LING415. Montreal, QC: n/a, 2011. Print.

Payne, Thomas Edward. Describing Morphosyntax: a Guide for Field Linguists. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge UP, 2008. Print.

Paul-Martin, Patsy. "Mi'kmaq Verb Conjugation." Ed. Orthography, Mi'kmaq Talking Posters Smith/Francis. Truto, NS: Eastern Woodland Print Communications, 2011. Print.

Proulx, Paul. "Proto-Algonquian Verb Inflection." Studies in Native American Languages 15.2 (1990): 100-45. Print.

van der Wouden, Ton, and Frans Zwarts. "Negative Concord." D. Gilbers and S. Looyenga (eds), Language and Cognition 2. Yearbook 1992 Linguistic Theory and Knowledge Representation of the University of Groningen (1992): 317-31. Print.

Negation

2014-08-07T18:23:35Z

Carol: /* Imperative */

=Introduction=
Negation is the process of turning affirmative statements into the opposite form. For example, the negative equivalent of affirmative sentence, ''I am eating'' is ''I am not eating''. In English there are a few processes at work. ''not'' must always come with an auxiliary verb like the verb 'to have' and 'to be'. In Mi'gmaq, with its extremely detailed and expansive verb conjugations in the present, it is not surprising that the negated conjugation of verbs is just as detailed and expansive as they are in the affirmative.

To start off any commentary on negation, it seems fitting to start of with the word "no" which is ''moqwa'' in Mi'gmaq. (The opposite of this is ''e'e'' , meaning "yes".) Negation in Mi'gmaq is similar to that of Obijwe in that there is both an affix that occurs between the verb and the person marker and a word that comes before the verb denoting negation. See [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ojibwe_grammar#Verbs Verb Conjugation in Ojibwe]. The Mi'gmaq negated affix is ''w'' or ''u'' which is very closely related to the Proto-Algonquian form for negation which is is ''*-w'' ( [http://kuscholarworks.ku.edu/dspace/bitstream/1808/440/1/ling.wp.v15.n2.paper6.pdf Proulx, 1990] ). ''w'' or ''u'' are very closely related phonetically since ''w'' is the semivowel corresponding to the vowel ''u''. Bear in mind that during the elicitation sessions, sometimes it was unsure whether to use ''w'' or ''u''.

Negation in Mi'gmaq consists of adding ''mu'' or ''ma'' then the verb conjugated in the negated verb form. After ''mu'' or ''ma'' the verb must always contain a negative particle. We must think of these two things as inseparable. ''mu'' always comes before the negative conjugated verb in the present or past, and ''ma'' always comes before future or if the prefix ''gis'' ('can', 'to be able to') is attached to the verb. All other prefixes abide by the rules ''mu'' before present or past and ''ma'' before future. There are other particles that take the negated form of the verb, but it is obvious that these particles express a negated idea.

Please note as well that in some of the studies on Mi'gmaq and Algonquian languages the term 'nonaffirmative' is used to describe the negated form. For consistency in this report, I will use the term 'negated' to indicate the form of the verb which is the opposite of affirmative. 'Nonaffirmative' and 'negated' however refer to the same process of negation.

= Conjugation of the Negated Verb =
I have selected the verb ''mijji'' (to eat). Please note that some resources spell this like ''mijji'' where other spell it ''miji'' ([http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED136614.pdf Micmac Teaching Grammar, 1976]). I have selected the spelling from [http://www.mikmaqonline.org/servlet/dictionaryFrameSet.html?arg0=mijjit&method=searchFromMikmaq the Migmaq talking dictionary]. It is also important to note that the Micmac Teaching Grammar uses an orthography that is different of all other orthographies used with Mi'gmaq. I will indicate which terms they are and give the Listuguj equivalent orthographical manner of writing them.

The simplified formula for the conjugation in the negated form: the base form + ''u'' or ''w'' + person ending ([http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED136614.pdf Micmac Teaching Grammar, 1976])
The base form for intransitive verbs is always the verb in the first person singular. For example I eat is ''mijji''. Now to create the second person singular we add the ending -''n'' denoting second person singular and get the form ''mijjin''. For another type of verb (henceforth referred to as the ''a'' verbs) we take the base form ''amalga-'' and add -''n'' to get ''amalgan'' (you dance) and to get the first person singular we add -''i''. Please note that it has been hypothesized that there are at least eleven different conjugations. We will only be dealing with a couple here. Because of reasons of time limitation, I was not able to elicit all eleven types but when there is a difference in conjugation, that will be noted. Note that in the plural the ''u'' or ''w'' comes after ''-ulti-''. This could be due the the fact that ''-ulti-'' is the plural affix that attaches to the base form of the verb and does not convey anything about the tense of the verb, rather it is used to denote that the verb is plural. Thus the ''u'' or ''w'' comes right before the tense marker which is always at the end of the verb. For the first person singular in present there is a null tense marker at the end of some verbs (for example the ''-i'' verbs) thus the negative marker is at the end.

== Present Tense ==
First is a comparison of the affirmative and negated paradigms of the verb ''mijji'' ('eat').

{| class="wikitable"
|+ mijji- 'eat'
|-
! scope="col" colspan="2"| ↓person / number→
! scope="col" | SG
! scope="col" | DU
! scope="col" | PL
|-
! scope="row" rowspan="2"| 1
! scope="row"| 13
| rowspan="2" | mijji
|mijjieg
|mijjultieg
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| mijji'gw
| mijjulti'gw
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2" | 2
| mijjin
| mijjioq
| mijjultioq
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2"| 3
| mijjit
| mijjijig
| mijjultijig
|-
|}

{| class="wikitable"
|+ mu mijji- 'not eat'
|-
! scope="col" colspan="2"| ↓person / number→
! scope="col" | SG
! scope="col" | DU
! scope="col" | PL
|-
! scope="row" rowspan="2"| 1
! scope="row"| 13
| rowspan="2" | mu mijjiw
| mu mijjiweg
| mu mijjultiweg
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| mu mijjigw
| mu mijjultigw
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2" | 2
| mu mijjiun
| mu mijjiwoq
| mu mijjultiwoq
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2"| 3
| mu mijjigw
| mu mijji'gw
| mu mijjulti'gw
|-
|}

The word ''mu'' signifies negation. When ''mu'' is in front of the verb, the verb must also be conjugated in the negative form. In the above table we see the intrusion of the sound ''u'', ''ew'' or ''w''. The following table illustrates the endings for the present negative tense, keeping in mind ''mu'' must ALWAYS come right before the negated verb. When ''mu'' precedes a verb it must ALWAYS be in the negated form.

Below is a table that summarizes the VAI -i stem negative person endings in present conjugation. Inanimate [IN] conjugation was taken from the Micmac Grammar (1976, pg 155).

{| class="wikitable"
|+ VAI -i stem negative present person endings
|-
! scope="col" colspan="2"| ↓person / number→
! scope="col" | SG
! scope="col" | DU
! scope="col" | PL
|-
! scope="row" rowspan="2"| 1
! scope="row"| 13
| rowspan="2" |-u
| -ultieweg
| -ultieweg
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| -ultieweg
| -ultieweg
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2" | 2
| -un
| -woq
| -uwoq
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2"| 3.AN
| -ug
| -ewg
| -ultiewg
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2"| 3.IN
| -nug
| -nugel
| -nultinugel
|-
|}

The forms for the first person dual and plural in the exclusive and inclusive forms are the same. As shown by other data, the dual form seems to be in the process of disappearing. This is one such example where the dual form does not exist for the plural first person. Some younger speakers do not use the dual form at all so it is not surprising that we find a gap in the dual form here. All this is according to the speaker but if we followed the pattern of the previous forms we would expect the dual form for the inclusive and exclusive first person to be ''-ieweg''. "When the verb is negated, then the -g third person is ALWAYS found" (Micmac Grammar, 1976 pg 93).

Below is a comparison of different verbs to give an idea of how to conjugate different types of verbs in the negated form. All forms are conjugated in the present singular third person animate. The form of -''elie-'' was taken from Micmac Grammar (pg 155). For more detail about these forms see [[VAI]].

{| class="wikitable"
! VAI stem || Base Form || Gloss || Affirmative || Gloss || Negated || Gloss
|-
| -i
| mijji-
| eat
| mijjit
| s/he eats
| mu mijjigw
| s/he does not eat
|-
| -a
| amalga-
| dance
| amalgat
| s/he dances
| mu amalgagw
| s/he does not dance
|-
| -a'si
| ala'si-
| go around
| ala'sit
| s/he goes around
| mu ala'sigw
| s/he does not go around
|-
| -e
| elie-
| go
| eliet
| s/he goes
| mu eliegw
| s/he does not go
|-
|}

For verb conjugations in the affirmative please see [http://firstnationhelp.com/ali/posters/pdf/verb_conjugation.pdf Mi'kmaq Verb Conjugation]. As you can see, this site uses the verb ''mijisi'' meaning 'to eat'. In Listuguj this is not used as the word for to eat because it sounds too close for the verb ''mejisi'' 'to excrete'.

=== Transitive ===
Below is the conjugation in present of a transitive verb that takes an inanimate object.

{| class="wikitable" style="text-align:center"
|+ VTI Conjugation Class 1: -m class
|-
! scope="col" | ↓subject / object→
! scope="col" | 0SG
! scope="col" | 0PL
|-
! scope="row" | 1
| malqutm
| malqutmann
|-
! scope="row" | 13
| malqutmeg
| malqutmegl
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| malqutmu'g
| malqutmu'gul
|-
! scope="row" | 2
| malqutmn
| malqutmnn
|-
! scope="row" | 2PL
| malqutmoq
| malqutmoqol
|-
! scope="row" | 3
| malqutmeg
| malqutmegl
|-
! scope="row" | 3PL
| malqutmi'tij
| malqutmi'titl
|}

{| class="wikitable" style="text-align:center"
|+ VTI Negative Conjugation Class 1: -m class
|-
! scope="col" | ↓subject / object→
! scope="col" | 0SG
! scope="col" | 0PL
|-
! scope="row" | 1
| mu malqutmu
| mu malqutmuann
|-
! scope="row" | 13
| mu malqutmueg
| mu malqutmuegl
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| mu malqutmugg
| mu malqutmuggul
|-
! scope="row" | 2
| mu malqutmu'n
| mu malqutmu'nn
|-
! scope="row" | 2PL
| mu malqutmuoq
| mu malqutmuoqol
|-
! scope="row" | 3
| mu malqutmug
| mu malqutmugul
|-
! scope="row" | 3PL
| mu malqutmi'tigw
| mu malqutmi'tigul
|-
|}

{| class="wikitable" style="text-align:center"
|+ VTI Negative Conjugation Class 1: -m class
|-
! scope="col" | ↓subject / object→
! scope="col" | 0SG
! scope="col" | 0PL
|-
! scope="row" | 1
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 13
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 12
|
|
|-
! scope="row" | 2
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 2PL
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 3
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 3PL
| -
| -
|-
|}

== Imperative ==
Here is the formation of the affirmative imperative:
{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijji-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 2 Second person
| mijji
| mijjigw
| mijjultigw
|-
|}

Now we compare it to the negated:
{| class="wikitable"
! ''mutt mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 2 Second person
| mutt mijjiw
| mutt mijjinew
| mutt mijjultinew
|-
|}

== Past Tense ==
Again for the past we compare the past and the negated past.

{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| mijjiap
| mijjieg'p
| mijjultieg'p
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| mijjiewg'p
| mijjultiewg'p
|-
| 2 Second person
| mijjit'p
| mijjiqop
| mijjultioqop
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| mijjip
| mijjpni'g
| mijjultpni'g
|}

Now let us look at the negated forms.

{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| mu mijjiewap
| mu mijjiewg'p
| mu mijjiewg'p
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| mu mijjiewg'p
| mu mijjiewg'p
|-
| 2 Second person
| mu mijjiewt'p
| mu mijjiewwaq'p
| mu mijjiewwaq'p
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| mu mijjug'p
| ?
| ?
|}

Thus this would be the conjugation of the negated form:

{| class="wikitable"
! Negated Past||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| -ewap
| -ewg'p
| -ewg'p
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| -ewg'p
| -ewg'p
|-
| 2 Second person
| -ewt'p
| -ewwaq'p
| -ewwaq'p
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| -ug'p
| ?
| ?
|}

For the third person the -''ug'p'' can change to -''ewgp'' for example:

<gl>
\gll Mu alasi-ew-g'p
not go-NEG-SG.PAST
\trans She didn't go
</gl>

== Future Tense ==
First let us compare the affirmative tense for eat:

{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| mijjias
| ?
| mijjit'snen
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
|
| mijjit'snu
|-
| 2 Second person
| mijjit's(g)
| ?
| mijjitoqs'p
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| mijjitew
| ''n/a''
| mijjultitaq
|}
I was not able to elicit dual forms.

We compare the future affirmative with the negated below:

{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| ma mijjiew
| ma mijjiug
| ma mijjiug
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| ma mijjiug
| ma mijjiug
|-
| 2 Second person
| ma mijjiwn
| ?
| ?
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| ma mijjiewg
| ''n/a''
| ma mijjultiewoq
|}
NOTE: In the future the ''mu'' changes to ''ma'' !! Like ''mu'', ''ma'' must always come before the verb conjugated in the negative future.
The correspondent was not able to produce a dual form in the future.

Now here is a paradigm of the negated endings in the future.

{| class="wikitable"
! Negated Future||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| -ew
| -ug
| -ug
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| -ug
| -ug
|-
| 2 Second person
| -iwn
| ?
| ?
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| -ewg
| ''n/a''
| -ultiwoq
|}

As you may have noticed the future tense is easy! The verbs take the same endings as the negated present tense but the ''mu'' is replaced with ''ma'' thus indicating future.

== When negation is used ==

When the verb is negated there must always find a negative particle (like ''mu'' or ''ma''). If not the sentence is ungrammatical as shown below:

<gl>
\gll *gis-wissugwatige-w
can-cook.1-NEG
\trans I cannot cook (intended meaning)
</gl>

The only form of the above sentence must be:

<gl>
\gll ma gis-wissugwatige-w
NEG can-cook.1-NEG
\trans I cannot cook
</gl>

Thus it is seen that ''ma'' comes before the verb, now making the sentence grammatical.

''ma'' always precedes the future tense AND when the ''gis'' prefix is attached to the verb conjugated in the present for example:

<gl>
\gll ma gis-amalga-w-g
NEG can-dance-NEG-3
\trans s/he cannot dance
</gl>

There are some expressions that always take the negative form of the verb such as ''me menga'' (not yet) and ''mowen'' (nobody) that take the negative form of the verb: (examples from [http://www.mikmaqonline.org/ Mi'gmaq Online Dictionary])

<gl>
\gll me menag newt ajetten-u-g
NEG yet one time-NEG-3
\trans it is not one o’clock yet
</gl>

<gl>
\gll mo-wen mijie-w-g
NEG-who eat-NEG-3
\trans no one is eating
</gl>

<gl>
\gll moqwa' goqwei eign-u-g
no thing be-NEG-3
\trans there is nothing there
</gl>

Below is a list of common particles after which the negated form is used. This list is not complete but these are the most common forms.

{| class="wikitable"
! Particle || When used || Translation
|-
| ''mu''
| before negated present and past
| not
|-
| ''mutt''
| before negated imperative
| do not
|-
| ''lpa mu''
| before negated present and past
| not even
|-
| ''mowen''
| before negated present, past and future
| no one/nobody
|-
| ''moqwa' goqwei'''
| before negated present, past and future
| nothing
|-
| ''me menag''
| before negated verb
| not yet
|-
| ''ma''
| before negated future verb and preverb ''gis'' (can)
| not
|-
|}

''moqwa' goqwei'' is also spelled ''mu goqwei'' and a variant of this is ''mu'' + negated verb + ''goqwei'' when used in object position. It is inanimate. As in the following example:

<gl>
\gll mu malqutem-u goqwei
NEG eat.1>0-NEG what
\trans I eat nothing
</gl>

== Negative Concord ==
As can be seen above, Mi'gmaq is a negative concord language. Negative concord is where "double or multiple negative[s] [do] not express an affirmative but a negative" (van der Wouden & Zwarts, 1992). This is similar to French ''Je n'ai vue personne'' 'I have seen nobody' where both the ''ne'' and ''personne'' are both negative but the resulting sentence is negative, rather than each cancelling the other out resulting in a affirmative sentence, i.e. 'I have seen someone'. Mi'gmaq has negation marked in two places with both negative particles, i.e. ''mu'' & ''ma'', and a negative conjugation of the verb, i.e. with ''-u'' or ''-w'' added. Compare examples <glr id="1"/> and <glr id="2"/>.

<gl id="1">
\gll lpa'tuj eigu-p
boy be.there.PST-SG
\trans the boy was there
</gl>

<gl id="2">
\gll lpa'tuj mu eimu-g-u-p
boy NEG be.there-PST-NEG-SG
\trans the boy was not there
</gl>

= Word Order =
The negative particle (or possibly affix) ''mu'' always appears before the verb it negates. Although words can intervene between ''mu'' and the verb it negates, ''mu'' must always precede the verb.

<gl>
\gll Mali mu amal-gag-u-p
Mali NEG dance-PAST-NEG-SG
\trans Mali did not dance
</gl>

<gl>
\gll mu Mali amal-gag-u-p
NEG Mali dance-PAST-NEG-SG
\trans Mali did not dance
</gl>

Placement of ''mu'' post-verbally results in ungrammaticality, as illustrated below.

<gl>
\gll lpa'tuj mu eimug-u-p
boy NEG be.there.PST-NEG-SG
\trans the boy was not there
</gl>

Acceptable word orders:
*mu eimugup lpa'tuj
*mu lpa'tuj eimugup

Unacceptable word orders:
* *eimugup lpa'tuj mu
* *eimugup mu lpa'tuj
* *lpa'tuj eimugup mu

Furthermore, with regards to word order, it appears that negation must come right before the constituent it negates. Here is an example sentence without negation:

<gl>
\gll ula na lpa'tuj ta'n egitgup wigatign
this DEM boy that read.PST book
\trans this is the boy that read the book
</gl>

If we want to negate the first clause, as to say "This is '''not''' the boy that read the book", negation must directly precede 'boy'.

<gl>
\gll ula na mu lpa'tuj ta'n egitgup wigatign
this DEM NEG boy that read.PST book
\trans this is not the boy that read the book
</gl>

The following word orders for negation in the first clause are impossible:
* *ula na lpa'tuj mu...
* *ula mu na lpa'tuj...
* *mu ula na lpa'tuj...

If we want to negate the second clause, as to say "This is the boy that did '''not''' read the book", the word order may be varied, as long as negation comes before the verb (as discussed previously).

== Scope of Negation ==
As stated above, ''mu'' always comes before the verb. There may be particles that intrude between ''mu'' and the negated verb, but as long as ''mu'' comes before the negated verb, the structure is grammatical. [http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED136614.pdf Micmac Grammar, 1976] Sometimes the meaning of the sentence can change depending on the position of ''mu''.

<gl>
\gll egjitm Mali mu amal-gag-u-p
possible Mali NEG dance-PST-NEG-SG
\trans it is true that Mali did not dance
</gl>

<gl>
\gll mu egjitm Mali amal-gag-u-p
NEG possible Mali dance-PST.NEG.SG
\trans it is not true that Mali danced
</gl>

We would also expect phrases with adverb-like particles translatable as "it is possible" or "it is true" or "it is obvious" would also vary regarding negation.

=Language change and negation=
Often I was not able to elicit both the dual and plural forms of a verb. There are many times when I could only elicit the dual form, or times when the dual and plural forms were the same. It has been noted by our consultants that younger speakers are not using the plural forms but are using the dual form to mean both dual and plural. This seems be a language change happening currently in the speech community where the younger generation is leading the change. As noted in the paradigm above for 'eat' in the negated present tense, both dual and plural forms are the same. Here it seems that the plural form is used for both dual and plural meanings. This would strongly suggest a change happening in the speech community.

=References=
Clark, Jeremiah S. "A Dictionary of the Micmac Language." Rand's Micmac Dictionary. Charlottetown, PEI: The Patriot Publishing Company, 1902. Print.

Delisle, Gill L., and Manny L. Metallic. Micmac Teaching Grammar. Ecowi, QC: Thunderbird Press, 1976. Print.

L'Abbe Maillard, M. Grammaire De La Langue Mikmaque. New York: Presse Cramoisy de Jean-Marie Shea, 1864. Print.

Metallic, Janine. "Mi'gmaq Elicitation Session for Field Methods of Linguistics." Ed. Class, Carol Little and LING415. Montreal, QC: n/a, 2011. Print.

Payne, Thomas Edward. Describing Morphosyntax: a Guide for Field Linguists. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge UP, 2008. Print.

Paul-Martin, Patsy. "Mi'kmaq Verb Conjugation." Ed. Orthography, Mi'kmaq Talking Posters Smith/Francis. Truto, NS: Eastern Woodland Print Communications, 2011. Print.

Proulx, Paul. "Proto-Algonquian Verb Inflection." Studies in Native American Languages 15.2 (1990): 100-45. Print.

van der Wouden, Ton, and Frans Zwarts. "Negative Concord." D. Gilbers and S. Looyenga (eds), Language and Cognition 2. Yearbook 1992 Linguistic Theory and Knowledge Representation of the University of Groningen (1992): 317-31. Print.

Negation

2014-08-07T18:22:58Z

Carol: /* Imperative */

=Introduction=
Negation is the process of turning affirmative statements into the opposite form. For example, the negative equivalent of affirmative sentence, ''I am eating'' is ''I am not eating''. In English there are a few processes at work. ''not'' must always come with an auxiliary verb like the verb 'to have' and 'to be'. In Mi'gmaq, with its extremely detailed and expansive verb conjugations in the present, it is not surprising that the negated conjugation of verbs is just as detailed and expansive as they are in the affirmative.

To start off any commentary on negation, it seems fitting to start of with the word "no" which is ''moqwa'' in Mi'gmaq. (The opposite of this is ''e'e'' , meaning "yes".) Negation in Mi'gmaq is similar to that of Obijwe in that there is both an affix that occurs between the verb and the person marker and a word that comes before the verb denoting negation. See [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ojibwe_grammar#Verbs Verb Conjugation in Ojibwe]. The Mi'gmaq negated affix is ''w'' or ''u'' which is very closely related to the Proto-Algonquian form for negation which is is ''*-w'' ( [http://kuscholarworks.ku.edu/dspace/bitstream/1808/440/1/ling.wp.v15.n2.paper6.pdf Proulx, 1990] ). ''w'' or ''u'' are very closely related phonetically since ''w'' is the semivowel corresponding to the vowel ''u''. Bear in mind that during the elicitation sessions, sometimes it was unsure whether to use ''w'' or ''u''.

Negation in Mi'gmaq consists of adding ''mu'' or ''ma'' then the verb conjugated in the negated verb form. After ''mu'' or ''ma'' the verb must always contain a negative particle. We must think of these two things as inseparable. ''mu'' always comes before the negative conjugated verb in the present or past, and ''ma'' always comes before future or if the prefix ''gis'' ('can', 'to be able to') is attached to the verb. All other prefixes abide by the rules ''mu'' before present or past and ''ma'' before future. There are other particles that take the negated form of the verb, but it is obvious that these particles express a negated idea.

Please note as well that in some of the studies on Mi'gmaq and Algonquian languages the term 'nonaffirmative' is used to describe the negated form. For consistency in this report, I will use the term 'negated' to indicate the form of the verb which is the opposite of affirmative. 'Nonaffirmative' and 'negated' however refer to the same process of negation.

= Conjugation of the Negated Verb =
I have selected the verb ''mijji'' (to eat). Please note that some resources spell this like ''mijji'' where other spell it ''miji'' ([http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED136614.pdf Micmac Teaching Grammar, 1976]). I have selected the spelling from [http://www.mikmaqonline.org/servlet/dictionaryFrameSet.html?arg0=mijjit&method=searchFromMikmaq the Migmaq talking dictionary]. It is also important to note that the Micmac Teaching Grammar uses an orthography that is different of all other orthographies used with Mi'gmaq. I will indicate which terms they are and give the Listuguj equivalent orthographical manner of writing them.

The simplified formula for the conjugation in the negated form: the base form + ''u'' or ''w'' + person ending ([http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED136614.pdf Micmac Teaching Grammar, 1976])
The base form for intransitive verbs is always the verb in the first person singular. For example I eat is ''mijji''. Now to create the second person singular we add the ending -''n'' denoting second person singular and get the form ''mijjin''. For another type of verb (henceforth referred to as the ''a'' verbs) we take the base form ''amalga-'' and add -''n'' to get ''amalgan'' (you dance) and to get the first person singular we add -''i''. Please note that it has been hypothesized that there are at least eleven different conjugations. We will only be dealing with a couple here. Because of reasons of time limitation, I was not able to elicit all eleven types but when there is a difference in conjugation, that will be noted. Note that in the plural the ''u'' or ''w'' comes after ''-ulti-''. This could be due the the fact that ''-ulti-'' is the plural affix that attaches to the base form of the verb and does not convey anything about the tense of the verb, rather it is used to denote that the verb is plural. Thus the ''u'' or ''w'' comes right before the tense marker which is always at the end of the verb. For the first person singular in present there is a null tense marker at the end of some verbs (for example the ''-i'' verbs) thus the negative marker is at the end.

== Present Tense ==
First is a comparison of the affirmative and negated paradigms of the verb ''mijji'' ('eat').

{| class="wikitable"
|+ mijji- 'eat'
|-
! scope="col" colspan="2"| ↓person / number→
! scope="col" | SG
! scope="col" | DU
! scope="col" | PL
|-
! scope="row" rowspan="2"| 1
! scope="row"| 13
| rowspan="2" | mijji
|mijjieg
|mijjultieg
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| mijji'gw
| mijjulti'gw
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2" | 2
| mijjin
| mijjioq
| mijjultioq
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2"| 3
| mijjit
| mijjijig
| mijjultijig
|-
|}

{| class="wikitable"
|+ mu mijji- 'not eat'
|-
! scope="col" colspan="2"| ↓person / number→
! scope="col" | SG
! scope="col" | DU
! scope="col" | PL
|-
! scope="row" rowspan="2"| 1
! scope="row"| 13
| rowspan="2" | mu mijjiw
| mu mijjiweg
| mu mijjultiweg
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| mu mijjigw
| mu mijjultigw
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2" | 2
| mu mijjiun
| mu mijjiwoq
| mu mijjultiwoq
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2"| 3
| mu mijjigw
| mu mijji'gw
| mu mijjulti'gw
|-
|}

The word ''mu'' signifies negation. When ''mu'' is in front of the verb, the verb must also be conjugated in the negative form. In the above table we see the intrusion of the sound ''u'', ''ew'' or ''w''. The following table illustrates the endings for the present negative tense, keeping in mind ''mu'' must ALWAYS come right before the negated verb. When ''mu'' precedes a verb it must ALWAYS be in the negated form.

Below is a table that summarizes the VAI -i stem negative person endings in present conjugation. Inanimate [IN] conjugation was taken from the Micmac Grammar (1976, pg 155).

{| class="wikitable"
|+ VAI -i stem negative present person endings
|-
! scope="col" colspan="2"| ↓person / number→
! scope="col" | SG
! scope="col" | DU
! scope="col" | PL
|-
! scope="row" rowspan="2"| 1
! scope="row"| 13
| rowspan="2" |-u
| -ultieweg
| -ultieweg
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| -ultieweg
| -ultieweg
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2" | 2
| -un
| -woq
| -uwoq
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2"| 3.AN
| -ug
| -ewg
| -ultiewg
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2"| 3.IN
| -nug
| -nugel
| -nultinugel
|-
|}

The forms for the first person dual and plural in the exclusive and inclusive forms are the same. As shown by other data, the dual form seems to be in the process of disappearing. This is one such example where the dual form does not exist for the plural first person. Some younger speakers do not use the dual form at all so it is not surprising that we find a gap in the dual form here. All this is according to the speaker but if we followed the pattern of the previous forms we would expect the dual form for the inclusive and exclusive first person to be ''-ieweg''. "When the verb is negated, then the -g third person is ALWAYS found" (Micmac Grammar, 1976 pg 93).

Below is a comparison of different verbs to give an idea of how to conjugate different types of verbs in the negated form. All forms are conjugated in the present singular third person animate. The form of -''elie-'' was taken from Micmac Grammar (pg 155). For more detail about these forms see [[VAI]].

{| class="wikitable"
! VAI stem || Base Form || Gloss || Affirmative || Gloss || Negated || Gloss
|-
| -i
| mijji-
| eat
| mijjit
| s/he eats
| mu mijjigw
| s/he does not eat
|-
| -a
| amalga-
| dance
| amalgat
| s/he dances
| mu amalgagw
| s/he does not dance
|-
| -a'si
| ala'si-
| go around
| ala'sit
| s/he goes around
| mu ala'sigw
| s/he does not go around
|-
| -e
| elie-
| go
| eliet
| s/he goes
| mu eliegw
| s/he does not go
|-
|}

For verb conjugations in the affirmative please see [http://firstnationhelp.com/ali/posters/pdf/verb_conjugation.pdf Mi'kmaq Verb Conjugation]. As you can see, this site uses the verb ''mijisi'' meaning 'to eat'. In Listuguj this is not used as the word for to eat because it sounds too close for the verb ''mejisi'' 'to excrete'.

=== Transitive ===
Below is the conjugation in present of a transitive verb that takes an inanimate object.

{| class="wikitable" style="text-align:center"
|+ VTI Conjugation Class 1: -m class
|-
! scope="col" | ↓subject / object→
! scope="col" | 0SG
! scope="col" | 0PL
|-
! scope="row" | 1
| malqutm
| malqutmann
|-
! scope="row" | 13
| malqutmeg
| malqutmegl
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| malqutmu'g
| malqutmu'gul
|-
! scope="row" | 2
| malqutmn
| malqutmnn
|-
! scope="row" | 2PL
| malqutmoq
| malqutmoqol
|-
! scope="row" | 3
| malqutmeg
| malqutmegl
|-
! scope="row" | 3PL
| malqutmi'tij
| malqutmi'titl
|}

{| class="wikitable" style="text-align:center"
|+ VTI Negative Conjugation Class 1: -m class
|-
! scope="col" | ↓subject / object→
! scope="col" | 0SG
! scope="col" | 0PL
|-
! scope="row" | 1
| mu malqutmu
| mu malqutmuann
|-
! scope="row" | 13
| mu malqutmueg
| mu malqutmuegl
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| mu malqutmugg
| mu malqutmuggul
|-
! scope="row" | 2
| mu malqutmu'n
| mu malqutmu'nn
|-
! scope="row" | 2PL
| mu malqutmuoq
| mu malqutmuoqol
|-
! scope="row" | 3
| mu malqutmug
| mu malqutmugul
|-
! scope="row" | 3PL
| mu malqutmi'tigw
| mu malqutmi'tigul
|-
|}

{| class="wikitable" style="text-align:center"
|+ VTI Negative Conjugation Class 1: -m class
|-
! scope="col" | ↓subject / object→
! scope="col" | 0SG
! scope="col" | 0PL
|-
! scope="row" | 1
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 13
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 12
|
|
|-
! scope="row" | 2
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 2PL
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 3
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 3PL
| -
| -
|-
|}

== Imperative ==
Here is the formation of the affirmative imperative:
{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijji-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 2 Second person
| mijji
| ?
| mijjultigw
|-
|}

Now we compare it to the negated:
{| class="wikitable"
! ''mutt mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 2 Second person
| mutt mijjiw
| ?
| mutt mijjultinew
|-
|}

== Past Tense ==
Again for the past we compare the past and the negated past.

{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| mijjiap
| mijjieg'p
| mijjultieg'p
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| mijjiewg'p
| mijjultiewg'p
|-
| 2 Second person
| mijjit'p
| mijjiqop
| mijjultioqop
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| mijjip
| mijjpni'g
| mijjultpni'g
|}

Now let us look at the negated forms.

{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| mu mijjiewap
| mu mijjiewg'p
| mu mijjiewg'p
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| mu mijjiewg'p
| mu mijjiewg'p
|-
| 2 Second person
| mu mijjiewt'p
| mu mijjiewwaq'p
| mu mijjiewwaq'p
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| mu mijjug'p
| ?
| ?
|}

Thus this would be the conjugation of the negated form:

{| class="wikitable"
! Negated Past||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| -ewap
| -ewg'p
| -ewg'p
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| -ewg'p
| -ewg'p
|-
| 2 Second person
| -ewt'p
| -ewwaq'p
| -ewwaq'p
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| -ug'p
| ?
| ?
|}

For the third person the -''ug'p'' can change to -''ewgp'' for example:

<gl>
\gll Mu alasi-ew-g'p
not go-NEG-SG.PAST
\trans She didn't go
</gl>

== Future Tense ==
First let us compare the affirmative tense for eat:

{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| mijjias
| ?
| mijjit'snen
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
|
| mijjit'snu
|-
| 2 Second person
| mijjit's(g)
| ?
| mijjitoqs'p
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| mijjitew
| ''n/a''
| mijjultitaq
|}
I was not able to elicit dual forms.

We compare the future affirmative with the negated below:

{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| ma mijjiew
| ma mijjiug
| ma mijjiug
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| ma mijjiug
| ma mijjiug
|-
| 2 Second person
| ma mijjiwn
| ?
| ?
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| ma mijjiewg
| ''n/a''
| ma mijjultiewoq
|}
NOTE: In the future the ''mu'' changes to ''ma'' !! Like ''mu'', ''ma'' must always come before the verb conjugated in the negative future.
The correspondent was not able to produce a dual form in the future.

Now here is a paradigm of the negated endings in the future.

{| class="wikitable"
! Negated Future||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| -ew
| -ug
| -ug
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| -ug
| -ug
|-
| 2 Second person
| -iwn
| ?
| ?
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| -ewg
| ''n/a''
| -ultiwoq
|}

As you may have noticed the future tense is easy! The verbs take the same endings as the negated present tense but the ''mu'' is replaced with ''ma'' thus indicating future.

== When negation is used ==

When the verb is negated there must always find a negative particle (like ''mu'' or ''ma''). If not the sentence is ungrammatical as shown below:

<gl>
\gll *gis-wissugwatige-w
can-cook.1-NEG
\trans I cannot cook (intended meaning)
</gl>

The only form of the above sentence must be:

<gl>
\gll ma gis-wissugwatige-w
NEG can-cook.1-NEG
\trans I cannot cook
</gl>

Thus it is seen that ''ma'' comes before the verb, now making the sentence grammatical.

''ma'' always precedes the future tense AND when the ''gis'' prefix is attached to the verb conjugated in the present for example:

<gl>
\gll ma gis-amalga-w-g
NEG can-dance-NEG-3
\trans s/he cannot dance
</gl>

There are some expressions that always take the negative form of the verb such as ''me menga'' (not yet) and ''mowen'' (nobody) that take the negative form of the verb: (examples from [http://www.mikmaqonline.org/ Mi'gmaq Online Dictionary])

<gl>
\gll me menag newt ajetten-u-g
NEG yet one time-NEG-3
\trans it is not one o’clock yet
</gl>

<gl>
\gll mo-wen mijie-w-g
NEG-who eat-NEG-3
\trans no one is eating
</gl>

<gl>
\gll moqwa' goqwei eign-u-g
no thing be-NEG-3
\trans there is nothing there
</gl>

Below is a list of common particles after which the negated form is used. This list is not complete but these are the most common forms.

{| class="wikitable"
! Particle || When used || Translation
|-
| ''mu''
| before negated present and past
| not
|-
| ''mutt''
| before negated imperative
| do not
|-
| ''lpa mu''
| before negated present and past
| not even
|-
| ''mowen''
| before negated present, past and future
| no one/nobody
|-
| ''moqwa' goqwei'''
| before negated present, past and future
| nothing
|-
| ''me menag''
| before negated verb
| not yet
|-
| ''ma''
| before negated future verb and preverb ''gis'' (can)
| not
|-
|}

''moqwa' goqwei'' is also spelled ''mu goqwei'' and a variant of this is ''mu'' + negated verb + ''goqwei'' when used in object position. It is inanimate. As in the following example:

<gl>
\gll mu malqutem-u goqwei
NEG eat.1>0-NEG what
\trans I eat nothing
</gl>

== Negative Concord ==
As can be seen above, Mi'gmaq is a negative concord language. Negative concord is where "double or multiple negative[s] [do] not express an affirmative but a negative" (van der Wouden & Zwarts, 1992). This is similar to French ''Je n'ai vue personne'' 'I have seen nobody' where both the ''ne'' and ''personne'' are both negative but the resulting sentence is negative, rather than each cancelling the other out resulting in a affirmative sentence, i.e. 'I have seen someone'. Mi'gmaq has negation marked in two places with both negative particles, i.e. ''mu'' & ''ma'', and a negative conjugation of the verb, i.e. with ''-u'' or ''-w'' added. Compare examples <glr id="1"/> and <glr id="2"/>.

<gl id="1">
\gll lpa'tuj eigu-p
boy be.there.PST-SG
\trans the boy was there
</gl>

<gl id="2">
\gll lpa'tuj mu eimu-g-u-p
boy NEG be.there-PST-NEG-SG
\trans the boy was not there
</gl>

= Word Order =
The negative particle (or possibly affix) ''mu'' always appears before the verb it negates. Although words can intervene between ''mu'' and the verb it negates, ''mu'' must always precede the verb.

<gl>
\gll Mali mu amal-gag-u-p
Mali NEG dance-PAST-NEG-SG
\trans Mali did not dance
</gl>

<gl>
\gll mu Mali amal-gag-u-p
NEG Mali dance-PAST-NEG-SG
\trans Mali did not dance
</gl>

Placement of ''mu'' post-verbally results in ungrammaticality, as illustrated below.

<gl>
\gll lpa'tuj mu eimug-u-p
boy NEG be.there.PST-NEG-SG
\trans the boy was not there
</gl>

Acceptable word orders:
*mu eimugup lpa'tuj
*mu lpa'tuj eimugup

Unacceptable word orders:
* *eimugup lpa'tuj mu
* *eimugup mu lpa'tuj
* *lpa'tuj eimugup mu

Furthermore, with regards to word order, it appears that negation must come right before the constituent it negates. Here is an example sentence without negation:

<gl>
\gll ula na lpa'tuj ta'n egitgup wigatign
this DEM boy that read.PST book
\trans this is the boy that read the book
</gl>

If we want to negate the first clause, as to say "This is '''not''' the boy that read the book", negation must directly precede 'boy'.

<gl>
\gll ula na mu lpa'tuj ta'n egitgup wigatign
this DEM NEG boy that read.PST book
\trans this is not the boy that read the book
</gl>

The following word orders for negation in the first clause are impossible:
* *ula na lpa'tuj mu...
* *ula mu na lpa'tuj...
* *mu ula na lpa'tuj...

If we want to negate the second clause, as to say "This is the boy that did '''not''' read the book", the word order may be varied, as long as negation comes before the verb (as discussed previously).

== Scope of Negation ==
As stated above, ''mu'' always comes before the verb. There may be particles that intrude between ''mu'' and the negated verb, but as long as ''mu'' comes before the negated verb, the structure is grammatical. [http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED136614.pdf Micmac Grammar, 1976] Sometimes the meaning of the sentence can change depending on the position of ''mu''.

<gl>
\gll egjitm Mali mu amal-gag-u-p
possible Mali NEG dance-PST-NEG-SG
\trans it is true that Mali did not dance
</gl>

<gl>
\gll mu egjitm Mali amal-gag-u-p
NEG possible Mali dance-PST.NEG.SG
\trans it is not true that Mali danced
</gl>

We would also expect phrases with adverb-like particles translatable as "it is possible" or "it is true" or "it is obvious" would also vary regarding negation.

=Language change and negation=
Often I was not able to elicit both the dual and plural forms of a verb. There are many times when I could only elicit the dual form, or times when the dual and plural forms were the same. It has been noted by our consultants that younger speakers are not using the plural forms but are using the dual form to mean both dual and plural. This seems be a language change happening currently in the speech community where the younger generation is leading the change. As noted in the paradigm above for 'eat' in the negated present tense, both dual and plural forms are the same. Here it seems that the plural form is used for both dual and plural meanings. This would strongly suggest a change happening in the speech community.

=References=
Clark, Jeremiah S. "A Dictionary of the Micmac Language." Rand's Micmac Dictionary. Charlottetown, PEI: The Patriot Publishing Company, 1902. Print.

Delisle, Gill L., and Manny L. Metallic. Micmac Teaching Grammar. Ecowi, QC: Thunderbird Press, 1976. Print.

L'Abbe Maillard, M. Grammaire De La Langue Mikmaque. New York: Presse Cramoisy de Jean-Marie Shea, 1864. Print.

Metallic, Janine. "Mi'gmaq Elicitation Session for Field Methods of Linguistics." Ed. Class, Carol Little and LING415. Montreal, QC: n/a, 2011. Print.

Payne, Thomas Edward. Describing Morphosyntax: a Guide for Field Linguists. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge UP, 2008. Print.

Paul-Martin, Patsy. "Mi'kmaq Verb Conjugation." Ed. Orthography, Mi'kmaq Talking Posters Smith/Francis. Truto, NS: Eastern Woodland Print Communications, 2011. Print.

Proulx, Paul. "Proto-Algonquian Verb Inflection." Studies in Native American Languages 15.2 (1990): 100-45. Print.

van der Wouden, Ton, and Frans Zwarts. "Negative Concord." D. Gilbers and S. Looyenga (eds), Language and Cognition 2. Yearbook 1992 Linguistic Theory and Knowledge Representation of the University of Groningen (1992): 317-31. Print.

Negation

2014-08-07T18:21:57Z

Carol: /* Transitive */

=Introduction=
Negation is the process of turning affirmative statements into the opposite form. For example, the negative equivalent of affirmative sentence, ''I am eating'' is ''I am not eating''. In English there are a few processes at work. ''not'' must always come with an auxiliary verb like the verb 'to have' and 'to be'. In Mi'gmaq, with its extremely detailed and expansive verb conjugations in the present, it is not surprising that the negated conjugation of verbs is just as detailed and expansive as they are in the affirmative.

To start off any commentary on negation, it seems fitting to start of with the word "no" which is ''moqwa'' in Mi'gmaq. (The opposite of this is ''e'e'' , meaning "yes".) Negation in Mi'gmaq is similar to that of Obijwe in that there is both an affix that occurs between the verb and the person marker and a word that comes before the verb denoting negation. See [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ojibwe_grammar#Verbs Verb Conjugation in Ojibwe]. The Mi'gmaq negated affix is ''w'' or ''u'' which is very closely related to the Proto-Algonquian form for negation which is is ''*-w'' ( [http://kuscholarworks.ku.edu/dspace/bitstream/1808/440/1/ling.wp.v15.n2.paper6.pdf Proulx, 1990] ). ''w'' or ''u'' are very closely related phonetically since ''w'' is the semivowel corresponding to the vowel ''u''. Bear in mind that during the elicitation sessions, sometimes it was unsure whether to use ''w'' or ''u''.

Negation in Mi'gmaq consists of adding ''mu'' or ''ma'' then the verb conjugated in the negated verb form. After ''mu'' or ''ma'' the verb must always contain a negative particle. We must think of these two things as inseparable. ''mu'' always comes before the negative conjugated verb in the present or past, and ''ma'' always comes before future or if the prefix ''gis'' ('can', 'to be able to') is attached to the verb. All other prefixes abide by the rules ''mu'' before present or past and ''ma'' before future. There are other particles that take the negated form of the verb, but it is obvious that these particles express a negated idea.

Please note as well that in some of the studies on Mi'gmaq and Algonquian languages the term 'nonaffirmative' is used to describe the negated form. For consistency in this report, I will use the term 'negated' to indicate the form of the verb which is the opposite of affirmative. 'Nonaffirmative' and 'negated' however refer to the same process of negation.

= Conjugation of the Negated Verb =
I have selected the verb ''mijji'' (to eat). Please note that some resources spell this like ''mijji'' where other spell it ''miji'' ([http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED136614.pdf Micmac Teaching Grammar, 1976]). I have selected the spelling from [http://www.mikmaqonline.org/servlet/dictionaryFrameSet.html?arg0=mijjit&method=searchFromMikmaq the Migmaq talking dictionary]. It is also important to note that the Micmac Teaching Grammar uses an orthography that is different of all other orthographies used with Mi'gmaq. I will indicate which terms they are and give the Listuguj equivalent orthographical manner of writing them.

The simplified formula for the conjugation in the negated form: the base form + ''u'' or ''w'' + person ending ([http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED136614.pdf Micmac Teaching Grammar, 1976])
The base form for intransitive verbs is always the verb in the first person singular. For example I eat is ''mijji''. Now to create the second person singular we add the ending -''n'' denoting second person singular and get the form ''mijjin''. For another type of verb (henceforth referred to as the ''a'' verbs) we take the base form ''amalga-'' and add -''n'' to get ''amalgan'' (you dance) and to get the first person singular we add -''i''. Please note that it has been hypothesized that there are at least eleven different conjugations. We will only be dealing with a couple here. Because of reasons of time limitation, I was not able to elicit all eleven types but when there is a difference in conjugation, that will be noted. Note that in the plural the ''u'' or ''w'' comes after ''-ulti-''. This could be due the the fact that ''-ulti-'' is the plural affix that attaches to the base form of the verb and does not convey anything about the tense of the verb, rather it is used to denote that the verb is plural. Thus the ''u'' or ''w'' comes right before the tense marker which is always at the end of the verb. For the first person singular in present there is a null tense marker at the end of some verbs (for example the ''-i'' verbs) thus the negative marker is at the end.

== Present Tense ==
First is a comparison of the affirmative and negated paradigms of the verb ''mijji'' ('eat').

{| class="wikitable"
|+ mijji- 'eat'
|-
! scope="col" colspan="2"| ↓person / number→
! scope="col" | SG
! scope="col" | DU
! scope="col" | PL
|-
! scope="row" rowspan="2"| 1
! scope="row"| 13
| rowspan="2" | mijji
|mijjieg
|mijjultieg
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| mijji'gw
| mijjulti'gw
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2" | 2
| mijjin
| mijjioq
| mijjultioq
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2"| 3
| mijjit
| mijjijig
| mijjultijig
|-
|}

{| class="wikitable"
|+ mu mijji- 'not eat'
|-
! scope="col" colspan="2"| ↓person / number→
! scope="col" | SG
! scope="col" | DU
! scope="col" | PL
|-
! scope="row" rowspan="2"| 1
! scope="row"| 13
| rowspan="2" | mu mijjiw
| mu mijjiweg
| mu mijjultiweg
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| mu mijjigw
| mu mijjultigw
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2" | 2
| mu mijjiun
| mu mijjiwoq
| mu mijjultiwoq
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2"| 3
| mu mijjigw
| mu mijji'gw
| mu mijjulti'gw
|-
|}

The word ''mu'' signifies negation. When ''mu'' is in front of the verb, the verb must also be conjugated in the negative form. In the above table we see the intrusion of the sound ''u'', ''ew'' or ''w''. The following table illustrates the endings for the present negative tense, keeping in mind ''mu'' must ALWAYS come right before the negated verb. When ''mu'' precedes a verb it must ALWAYS be in the negated form.

Below is a table that summarizes the VAI -i stem negative person endings in present conjugation. Inanimate [IN] conjugation was taken from the Micmac Grammar (1976, pg 155).

{| class="wikitable"
|+ VAI -i stem negative present person endings
|-
! scope="col" colspan="2"| ↓person / number→
! scope="col" | SG
! scope="col" | DU
! scope="col" | PL
|-
! scope="row" rowspan="2"| 1
! scope="row"| 13
| rowspan="2" |-u
| -ultieweg
| -ultieweg
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| -ultieweg
| -ultieweg
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2" | 2
| -un
| -woq
| -uwoq
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2"| 3.AN
| -ug
| -ewg
| -ultiewg
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2"| 3.IN
| -nug
| -nugel
| -nultinugel
|-
|}

The forms for the first person dual and plural in the exclusive and inclusive forms are the same. As shown by other data, the dual form seems to be in the process of disappearing. This is one such example where the dual form does not exist for the plural first person. Some younger speakers do not use the dual form at all so it is not surprising that we find a gap in the dual form here. All this is according to the speaker but if we followed the pattern of the previous forms we would expect the dual form for the inclusive and exclusive first person to be ''-ieweg''. "When the verb is negated, then the -g third person is ALWAYS found" (Micmac Grammar, 1976 pg 93).

Below is a comparison of different verbs to give an idea of how to conjugate different types of verbs in the negated form. All forms are conjugated in the present singular third person animate. The form of -''elie-'' was taken from Micmac Grammar (pg 155). For more detail about these forms see [[VAI]].

{| class="wikitable"
! VAI stem || Base Form || Gloss || Affirmative || Gloss || Negated || Gloss
|-
| -i
| mijji-
| eat
| mijjit
| s/he eats
| mu mijjigw
| s/he does not eat
|-
| -a
| amalga-
| dance
| amalgat
| s/he dances
| mu amalgagw
| s/he does not dance
|-
| -a'si
| ala'si-
| go around
| ala'sit
| s/he goes around
| mu ala'sigw
| s/he does not go around
|-
| -e
| elie-
| go
| eliet
| s/he goes
| mu eliegw
| s/he does not go
|-
|}

For verb conjugations in the affirmative please see [http://firstnationhelp.com/ali/posters/pdf/verb_conjugation.pdf Mi'kmaq Verb Conjugation]. As you can see, this site uses the verb ''mijisi'' meaning 'to eat'. In Listuguj this is not used as the word for to eat because it sounds too close for the verb ''mejisi'' 'to excrete'.

=== Transitive ===
Below is the conjugation in present of a transitive verb that takes an inanimate object.

{| class="wikitable" style="text-align:center"
|+ VTI Conjugation Class 1: -m class
|-
! scope="col" | ↓subject / object→
! scope="col" | 0SG
! scope="col" | 0PL
|-
! scope="row" | 1
| malqutm
| malqutmann
|-
! scope="row" | 13
| malqutmeg
| malqutmegl
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| malqutmu'g
| malqutmu'gul
|-
! scope="row" | 2
| malqutmn
| malqutmnn
|-
! scope="row" | 2PL
| malqutmoq
| malqutmoqol
|-
! scope="row" | 3
| malqutmeg
| malqutmegl
|-
! scope="row" | 3PL
| malqutmi'tij
| malqutmi'titl
|}

{| class="wikitable" style="text-align:center"
|+ VTI Negative Conjugation Class 1: -m class
|-
! scope="col" | ↓subject / object→
! scope="col" | 0SG
! scope="col" | 0PL
|-
! scope="row" | 1
| mu malqutmu
| mu malqutmuann
|-
! scope="row" | 13
| mu malqutmueg
| mu malqutmuegl
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| mu malqutmugg
| mu malqutmuggul
|-
! scope="row" | 2
| mu malqutmu'n
| mu malqutmu'nn
|-
! scope="row" | 2PL
| mu malqutmuoq
| mu malqutmuoqol
|-
! scope="row" | 3
| mu malqutmug
| mu malqutmugul
|-
! scope="row" | 3PL
| mu malqutmi'tigw
| mu malqutmi'tigul
|-
|}

{| class="wikitable" style="text-align:center"
|+ VTI Negative Conjugation Class 1: -m class
|-
! scope="col" | ↓subject / object→
! scope="col" | 0SG
! scope="col" | 0PL
|-
! scope="row" | 1
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 13
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 12
|
|
|-
! scope="row" | 2
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 2PL
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 3
| -
| -
|-
! scope="row" | 3PL
| -
| -
|-
|}

== Imperative ==
Here is the formation of the affirmative imperative:
{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijji-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 2 Second person
| mijji
| ?
| mijjultiug
|-
|}

Now we compare it to the negated:
{| class="wikitable"
! ''mutt mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 2 Second person
| mutt mijjiew
| ?
| mutt mijjultineu
|-
|}

== Past Tense ==
Again for the past we compare the past and the negated past.

{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| mijjiap
| mijjieg'p
| mijjultieg'p
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| mijjiewg'p
| mijjultiewg'p
|-
| 2 Second person
| mijjit'p
| mijjiqop
| mijjultioqop
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| mijjip
| mijjpni'g
| mijjultpni'g
|}

Now let us look at the negated forms.

{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| mu mijjiewap
| mu mijjiewg'p
| mu mijjiewg'p
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| mu mijjiewg'p
| mu mijjiewg'p
|-
| 2 Second person
| mu mijjiewt'p
| mu mijjiewwaq'p
| mu mijjiewwaq'p
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| mu mijjug'p
| ?
| ?
|}

Thus this would be the conjugation of the negated form:

{| class="wikitable"
! Negated Past||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| -ewap
| -ewg'p
| -ewg'p
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| -ewg'p
| -ewg'p
|-
| 2 Second person
| -ewt'p
| -ewwaq'p
| -ewwaq'p
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| -ug'p
| ?
| ?
|}

For the third person the -''ug'p'' can change to -''ewgp'' for example:

<gl>
\gll Mu alasi-ew-g'p
not go-NEG-SG.PAST
\trans She didn't go
</gl>

== Future Tense ==
First let us compare the affirmative tense for eat:

{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| mijjias
| ?
| mijjit'snen
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
|
| mijjit'snu
|-
| 2 Second person
| mijjit's(g)
| ?
| mijjitoqs'p
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| mijjitew
| ''n/a''
| mijjultitaq
|}
I was not able to elicit dual forms.

We compare the future affirmative with the negated below:

{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| ma mijjiew
| ma mijjiug
| ma mijjiug
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| ma mijjiug
| ma mijjiug
|-
| 2 Second person
| ma mijjiwn
| ?
| ?
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| ma mijjiewg
| ''n/a''
| ma mijjultiewoq
|}
NOTE: In the future the ''mu'' changes to ''ma'' !! Like ''mu'', ''ma'' must always come before the verb conjugated in the negative future.
The correspondent was not able to produce a dual form in the future.

Now here is a paradigm of the negated endings in the future.

{| class="wikitable"
! Negated Future||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| -ew
| -ug
| -ug
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| -ug
| -ug
|-
| 2 Second person
| -iwn
| ?
| ?
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| -ewg
| ''n/a''
| -ultiwoq
|}

As you may have noticed the future tense is easy! The verbs take the same endings as the negated present tense but the ''mu'' is replaced with ''ma'' thus indicating future.

== When negation is used ==

When the verb is negated there must always find a negative particle (like ''mu'' or ''ma''). If not the sentence is ungrammatical as shown below:

<gl>
\gll *gis-wissugwatige-w
can-cook.1-NEG
\trans I cannot cook (intended meaning)
</gl>

The only form of the above sentence must be:

<gl>
\gll ma gis-wissugwatige-w
NEG can-cook.1-NEG
\trans I cannot cook
</gl>

Thus it is seen that ''ma'' comes before the verb, now making the sentence grammatical.

''ma'' always precedes the future tense AND when the ''gis'' prefix is attached to the verb conjugated in the present for example:

<gl>
\gll ma gis-amalga-w-g
NEG can-dance-NEG-3
\trans s/he cannot dance
</gl>

There are some expressions that always take the negative form of the verb such as ''me menga'' (not yet) and ''mowen'' (nobody) that take the negative form of the verb: (examples from [http://www.mikmaqonline.org/ Mi'gmaq Online Dictionary])

<gl>
\gll me menag newt ajetten-u-g
NEG yet one time-NEG-3
\trans it is not one o’clock yet
</gl>

<gl>
\gll mo-wen mijie-w-g
NEG-who eat-NEG-3
\trans no one is eating
</gl>

<gl>
\gll moqwa' goqwei eign-u-g
no thing be-NEG-3
\trans there is nothing there
</gl>

Below is a list of common particles after which the negated form is used. This list is not complete but these are the most common forms.

{| class="wikitable"
! Particle || When used || Translation
|-
| ''mu''
| before negated present and past
| not
|-
| ''mutt''
| before negated imperative
| do not
|-
| ''lpa mu''
| before negated present and past
| not even
|-
| ''mowen''
| before negated present, past and future
| no one/nobody
|-
| ''moqwa' goqwei'''
| before negated present, past and future
| nothing
|-
| ''me menag''
| before negated verb
| not yet
|-
| ''ma''
| before negated future verb and preverb ''gis'' (can)
| not
|-
|}

''moqwa' goqwei'' is also spelled ''mu goqwei'' and a variant of this is ''mu'' + negated verb + ''goqwei'' when used in object position. It is inanimate. As in the following example:

<gl>
\gll mu malqutem-u goqwei
NEG eat.1>0-NEG what
\trans I eat nothing
</gl>

== Negative Concord ==
As can be seen above, Mi'gmaq is a negative concord language. Negative concord is where "double or multiple negative[s] [do] not express an affirmative but a negative" (van der Wouden & Zwarts, 1992). This is similar to French ''Je n'ai vue personne'' 'I have seen nobody' where both the ''ne'' and ''personne'' are both negative but the resulting sentence is negative, rather than each cancelling the other out resulting in a affirmative sentence, i.e. 'I have seen someone'. Mi'gmaq has negation marked in two places with both negative particles, i.e. ''mu'' & ''ma'', and a negative conjugation of the verb, i.e. with ''-u'' or ''-w'' added. Compare examples <glr id="1"/> and <glr id="2"/>.

<gl id="1">
\gll lpa'tuj eigu-p
boy be.there.PST-SG
\trans the boy was there
</gl>

<gl id="2">
\gll lpa'tuj mu eimu-g-u-p
boy NEG be.there-PST-NEG-SG
\trans the boy was not there
</gl>

= Word Order =
The negative particle (or possibly affix) ''mu'' always appears before the verb it negates. Although words can intervene between ''mu'' and the verb it negates, ''mu'' must always precede the verb.

<gl>
\gll Mali mu amal-gag-u-p
Mali NEG dance-PAST-NEG-SG
\trans Mali did not dance
</gl>

<gl>
\gll mu Mali amal-gag-u-p
NEG Mali dance-PAST-NEG-SG
\trans Mali did not dance
</gl>

Placement of ''mu'' post-verbally results in ungrammaticality, as illustrated below.

<gl>
\gll lpa'tuj mu eimug-u-p
boy NEG be.there.PST-NEG-SG
\trans the boy was not there
</gl>

Acceptable word orders:
*mu eimugup lpa'tuj
*mu lpa'tuj eimugup

Unacceptable word orders:
* *eimugup lpa'tuj mu
* *eimugup mu lpa'tuj
* *lpa'tuj eimugup mu

Furthermore, with regards to word order, it appears that negation must come right before the constituent it negates. Here is an example sentence without negation:

<gl>
\gll ula na lpa'tuj ta'n egitgup wigatign
this DEM boy that read.PST book
\trans this is the boy that read the book
</gl>

If we want to negate the first clause, as to say "This is '''not''' the boy that read the book", negation must directly precede 'boy'.

<gl>
\gll ula na mu lpa'tuj ta'n egitgup wigatign
this DEM NEG boy that read.PST book
\trans this is not the boy that read the book
</gl>

The following word orders for negation in the first clause are impossible:
* *ula na lpa'tuj mu...
* *ula mu na lpa'tuj...
* *mu ula na lpa'tuj...

If we want to negate the second clause, as to say "This is the boy that did '''not''' read the book", the word order may be varied, as long as negation comes before the verb (as discussed previously).

== Scope of Negation ==
As stated above, ''mu'' always comes before the verb. There may be particles that intrude between ''mu'' and the negated verb, but as long as ''mu'' comes before the negated verb, the structure is grammatical. [http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED136614.pdf Micmac Grammar, 1976] Sometimes the meaning of the sentence can change depending on the position of ''mu''.

<gl>
\gll egjitm Mali mu amal-gag-u-p
possible Mali NEG dance-PST-NEG-SG
\trans it is true that Mali did not dance
</gl>

<gl>
\gll mu egjitm Mali amal-gag-u-p
NEG possible Mali dance-PST.NEG.SG
\trans it is not true that Mali danced
</gl>

We would also expect phrases with adverb-like particles translatable as "it is possible" or "it is true" or "it is obvious" would also vary regarding negation.

=Language change and negation=
Often I was not able to elicit both the dual and plural forms of a verb. There are many times when I could only elicit the dual form, or times when the dual and plural forms were the same. It has been noted by our consultants that younger speakers are not using the plural forms but are using the dual form to mean both dual and plural. This seems be a language change happening currently in the speech community where the younger generation is leading the change. As noted in the paradigm above for 'eat' in the negated present tense, both dual and plural forms are the same. Here it seems that the plural form is used for both dual and plural meanings. This would strongly suggest a change happening in the speech community.

=References=
Clark, Jeremiah S. "A Dictionary of the Micmac Language." Rand's Micmac Dictionary. Charlottetown, PEI: The Patriot Publishing Company, 1902. Print.

Delisle, Gill L., and Manny L. Metallic. Micmac Teaching Grammar. Ecowi, QC: Thunderbird Press, 1976. Print.

L'Abbe Maillard, M. Grammaire De La Langue Mikmaque. New York: Presse Cramoisy de Jean-Marie Shea, 1864. Print.

Metallic, Janine. "Mi'gmaq Elicitation Session for Field Methods of Linguistics." Ed. Class, Carol Little and LING415. Montreal, QC: n/a, 2011. Print.

Payne, Thomas Edward. Describing Morphosyntax: a Guide for Field Linguists. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge UP, 2008. Print.

Paul-Martin, Patsy. "Mi'kmaq Verb Conjugation." Ed. Orthography, Mi'kmaq Talking Posters Smith/Francis. Truto, NS: Eastern Woodland Print Communications, 2011. Print.

Proulx, Paul. "Proto-Algonquian Verb Inflection." Studies in Native American Languages 15.2 (1990): 100-45. Print.

van der Wouden, Ton, and Frans Zwarts. "Negative Concord." D. Gilbers and S. Looyenga (eds), Language and Cognition 2. Yearbook 1992 Linguistic Theory and Knowledge Representation of the University of Groningen (1992): 317-31. Print.

Negation

2014-08-07T18:21:08Z

Carol: /* Transitive */

=Introduction=
Negation is the process of turning affirmative statements into the opposite form. For example, the negative equivalent of affirmative sentence, ''I am eating'' is ''I am not eating''. In English there are a few processes at work. ''not'' must always come with an auxiliary verb like the verb 'to have' and 'to be'. In Mi'gmaq, with its extremely detailed and expansive verb conjugations in the present, it is not surprising that the negated conjugation of verbs is just as detailed and expansive as they are in the affirmative.

To start off any commentary on negation, it seems fitting to start of with the word "no" which is ''moqwa'' in Mi'gmaq. (The opposite of this is ''e'e'' , meaning "yes".) Negation in Mi'gmaq is similar to that of Obijwe in that there is both an affix that occurs between the verb and the person marker and a word that comes before the verb denoting negation. See [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ojibwe_grammar#Verbs Verb Conjugation in Ojibwe]. The Mi'gmaq negated affix is ''w'' or ''u'' which is very closely related to the Proto-Algonquian form for negation which is is ''*-w'' ( [http://kuscholarworks.ku.edu/dspace/bitstream/1808/440/1/ling.wp.v15.n2.paper6.pdf Proulx, 1990] ). ''w'' or ''u'' are very closely related phonetically since ''w'' is the semivowel corresponding to the vowel ''u''. Bear in mind that during the elicitation sessions, sometimes it was unsure whether to use ''w'' or ''u''.

Negation in Mi'gmaq consists of adding ''mu'' or ''ma'' then the verb conjugated in the negated verb form. After ''mu'' or ''ma'' the verb must always contain a negative particle. We must think of these two things as inseparable. ''mu'' always comes before the negative conjugated verb in the present or past, and ''ma'' always comes before future or if the prefix ''gis'' ('can', 'to be able to') is attached to the verb. All other prefixes abide by the rules ''mu'' before present or past and ''ma'' before future. There are other particles that take the negated form of the verb, but it is obvious that these particles express a negated idea.

Please note as well that in some of the studies on Mi'gmaq and Algonquian languages the term 'nonaffirmative' is used to describe the negated form. For consistency in this report, I will use the term 'negated' to indicate the form of the verb which is the opposite of affirmative. 'Nonaffirmative' and 'negated' however refer to the same process of negation.

= Conjugation of the Negated Verb =
I have selected the verb ''mijji'' (to eat). Please note that some resources spell this like ''mijji'' where other spell it ''miji'' ([http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED136614.pdf Micmac Teaching Grammar, 1976]). I have selected the spelling from [http://www.mikmaqonline.org/servlet/dictionaryFrameSet.html?arg0=mijjit&method=searchFromMikmaq the Migmaq talking dictionary]. It is also important to note that the Micmac Teaching Grammar uses an orthography that is different of all other orthographies used with Mi'gmaq. I will indicate which terms they are and give the Listuguj equivalent orthographical manner of writing them.

The simplified formula for the conjugation in the negated form: the base form + ''u'' or ''w'' + person ending ([http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED136614.pdf Micmac Teaching Grammar, 1976])
The base form for intransitive verbs is always the verb in the first person singular. For example I eat is ''mijji''. Now to create the second person singular we add the ending -''n'' denoting second person singular and get the form ''mijjin''. For another type of verb (henceforth referred to as the ''a'' verbs) we take the base form ''amalga-'' and add -''n'' to get ''amalgan'' (you dance) and to get the first person singular we add -''i''. Please note that it has been hypothesized that there are at least eleven different conjugations. We will only be dealing with a couple here. Because of reasons of time limitation, I was not able to elicit all eleven types but when there is a difference in conjugation, that will be noted. Note that in the plural the ''u'' or ''w'' comes after ''-ulti-''. This could be due the the fact that ''-ulti-'' is the plural affix that attaches to the base form of the verb and does not convey anything about the tense of the verb, rather it is used to denote that the verb is plural. Thus the ''u'' or ''w'' comes right before the tense marker which is always at the end of the verb. For the first person singular in present there is a null tense marker at the end of some verbs (for example the ''-i'' verbs) thus the negative marker is at the end.

== Present Tense ==
First is a comparison of the affirmative and negated paradigms of the verb ''mijji'' ('eat').

{| class="wikitable"
|+ mijji- 'eat'
|-
! scope="col" colspan="2"| ↓person / number→
! scope="col" | SG
! scope="col" | DU
! scope="col" | PL
|-
! scope="row" rowspan="2"| 1
! scope="row"| 13
| rowspan="2" | mijji
|mijjieg
|mijjultieg
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| mijji'gw
| mijjulti'gw
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2" | 2
| mijjin
| mijjioq
| mijjultioq
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2"| 3
| mijjit
| mijjijig
| mijjultijig
|-
|}

{| class="wikitable"
|+ mu mijji- 'not eat'
|-
! scope="col" colspan="2"| ↓person / number→
! scope="col" | SG
! scope="col" | DU
! scope="col" | PL
|-
! scope="row" rowspan="2"| 1
! scope="row"| 13
| rowspan="2" | mu mijjiw
| mu mijjiweg
| mu mijjultiweg
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| mu mijjigw
| mu mijjultigw
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2" | 2
| mu mijjiun
| mu mijjiwoq
| mu mijjultiwoq
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2"| 3
| mu mijjigw
| mu mijji'gw
| mu mijjulti'gw
|-
|}

The word ''mu'' signifies negation. When ''mu'' is in front of the verb, the verb must also be conjugated in the negative form. In the above table we see the intrusion of the sound ''u'', ''ew'' or ''w''. The following table illustrates the endings for the present negative tense, keeping in mind ''mu'' must ALWAYS come right before the negated verb. When ''mu'' precedes a verb it must ALWAYS be in the negated form.

Below is a table that summarizes the VAI -i stem negative person endings in present conjugation. Inanimate [IN] conjugation was taken from the Micmac Grammar (1976, pg 155).

{| class="wikitable"
|+ VAI -i stem negative present person endings
|-
! scope="col" colspan="2"| ↓person / number→
! scope="col" | SG
! scope="col" | DU
! scope="col" | PL
|-
! scope="row" rowspan="2"| 1
! scope="row"| 13
| rowspan="2" |-u
| -ultieweg
| -ultieweg
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| -ultieweg
| -ultieweg
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2" | 2
| -un
| -woq
| -uwoq
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2"| 3.AN
| -ug
| -ewg
| -ultiewg
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2"| 3.IN
| -nug
| -nugel
| -nultinugel
|-
|}

The forms for the first person dual and plural in the exclusive and inclusive forms are the same. As shown by other data, the dual form seems to be in the process of disappearing. This is one such example where the dual form does not exist for the plural first person. Some younger speakers do not use the dual form at all so it is not surprising that we find a gap in the dual form here. All this is according to the speaker but if we followed the pattern of the previous forms we would expect the dual form for the inclusive and exclusive first person to be ''-ieweg''. "When the verb is negated, then the -g third person is ALWAYS found" (Micmac Grammar, 1976 pg 93).

Below is a comparison of different verbs to give an idea of how to conjugate different types of verbs in the negated form. All forms are conjugated in the present singular third person animate. The form of -''elie-'' was taken from Micmac Grammar (pg 155). For more detail about these forms see [[VAI]].

{| class="wikitable"
! VAI stem || Base Form || Gloss || Affirmative || Gloss || Negated || Gloss
|-
| -i
| mijji-
| eat
| mijjit
| s/he eats
| mu mijjigw
| s/he does not eat
|-
| -a
| amalga-
| dance
| amalgat
| s/he dances
| mu amalgagw
| s/he does not dance
|-
| -a'si
| ala'si-
| go around
| ala'sit
| s/he goes around
| mu ala'sigw
| s/he does not go around
|-
| -e
| elie-
| go
| eliet
| s/he goes
| mu eliegw
| s/he does not go
|-
|}

For verb conjugations in the affirmative please see [http://firstnationhelp.com/ali/posters/pdf/verb_conjugation.pdf Mi'kmaq Verb Conjugation]. As you can see, this site uses the verb ''mijisi'' meaning 'to eat'. In Listuguj this is not used as the word for to eat because it sounds too close for the verb ''mejisi'' 'to excrete'.

=== Transitive ===
Below is the conjugation in present of a transitive verb that takes an inanimate object.

{| class="wikitable" style="text-align:center"
|+ VTI Conjugation Class 1: -m class
|-
! scope="col" | ↓subject / object→
! scope="col" | 0SG
! scope="col" | 0PL
|-
! scope="row" | 1
| malqutm
| malqutmann
|-
! scope="row" | 13
| malqutmeg
| malqutmegl
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| malqutmu'g
| malqutmu'gul
|-
! scope="row" | 2
| malqutmn
| malqutmnn
|-
! scope="row" | 2PL
| malqutmoq
| malqutmoqol
|-
! scope="row" | 3
| malqutmeg
| malqutmegl
|-
! scope="row" | 3PL
| malqutmi'tij
| malqutmi'titl
|}

{| class="wikitable" style="text-align:center"
|+ VTI Negative Conjugation Class 1: -m class
|-
! scope="col" | ↓subject / object→
! scope="col" | 0SG
! scope="col" | 0PL
|-
! scope="row" | 1
| mu malqutmu
| mu malqutmuann
|-
! scope="row" | 13
| mu malqutmueg
| mu malqutmuegl
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| mu malqutmugg
| mu malqutmuggul
|-
! scope="row" | 2
| mu malqutmu'n
| mu malqutmu'nn
|-
! scope="row" | 2PL
| mu malqutmuoq
| mu malqutmuoqol
|-
! scope="row" | 3
| mu malqutmug
| mu malqutmugul
|-
! scope="row" | 3PL
| mu malqutmi'tigw
| mu malqutmi'tigul
|-
|}

{| class="wikitable" style="text-align:center"
|+ VTI Negative Conjugation Class 1: -m class
|-
! scope="col" | ↓subject / object→
! scope="col" | 0SG
! scope="col" | 0PL
|-
! scope="row" | 1
| -mu
| -muann
|-
! scope="row" | 13
| -mueg
| -muegl
|-
! scope="row" | 12
|
|
|-
! scope="row" | 2
| -mu'n
| -mu'nn
|-
! scope="row" | 2PL
| -muoq
| -muoqol
|-
! scope="row" | 3
| -mug
| -mugl
|-
! scope="row" | 3PL
| -mu'tiwgw
| -mu'tiwgwl
|-
|}

== Imperative ==
Here is the formation of the affirmative imperative:
{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijji-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 2 Second person
| mijji
| ?
| mijjultiug
|-
|}

Now we compare it to the negated:
{| class="wikitable"
! ''mutt mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 2 Second person
| mutt mijjiew
| ?
| mutt mijjultineu
|-
|}

== Past Tense ==
Again for the past we compare the past and the negated past.

{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| mijjiap
| mijjieg'p
| mijjultieg'p
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| mijjiewg'p
| mijjultiewg'p
|-
| 2 Second person
| mijjit'p
| mijjiqop
| mijjultioqop
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| mijjip
| mijjpni'g
| mijjultpni'g
|}

Now let us look at the negated forms.

{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| mu mijjiewap
| mu mijjiewg'p
| mu mijjiewg'p
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| mu mijjiewg'p
| mu mijjiewg'p
|-
| 2 Second person
| mu mijjiewt'p
| mu mijjiewwaq'p
| mu mijjiewwaq'p
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| mu mijjug'p
| ?
| ?
|}

Thus this would be the conjugation of the negated form:

{| class="wikitable"
! Negated Past||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| -ewap
| -ewg'p
| -ewg'p
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| -ewg'p
| -ewg'p
|-
| 2 Second person
| -ewt'p
| -ewwaq'p
| -ewwaq'p
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| -ug'p
| ?
| ?
|}

For the third person the -''ug'p'' can change to -''ewgp'' for example:

<gl>
\gll Mu alasi-ew-g'p
not go-NEG-SG.PAST
\trans She didn't go
</gl>

== Future Tense ==
First let us compare the affirmative tense for eat:

{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| mijjias
| ?
| mijjit'snen
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
|
| mijjit'snu
|-
| 2 Second person
| mijjit's(g)
| ?
| mijjitoqs'p
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| mijjitew
| ''n/a''
| mijjultitaq
|}
I was not able to elicit dual forms.

We compare the future affirmative with the negated below:

{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| ma mijjiew
| ma mijjiug
| ma mijjiug
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| ma mijjiug
| ma mijjiug
|-
| 2 Second person
| ma mijjiwn
| ?
| ?
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| ma mijjiewg
| ''n/a''
| ma mijjultiewoq
|}
NOTE: In the future the ''mu'' changes to ''ma'' !! Like ''mu'', ''ma'' must always come before the verb conjugated in the negative future.
The correspondent was not able to produce a dual form in the future.

Now here is a paradigm of the negated endings in the future.

{| class="wikitable"
! Negated Future||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| -ew
| -ug
| -ug
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| -ug
| -ug
|-
| 2 Second person
| -iwn
| ?
| ?
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| -ewg
| ''n/a''
| -ultiwoq
|}

As you may have noticed the future tense is easy! The verbs take the same endings as the negated present tense but the ''mu'' is replaced with ''ma'' thus indicating future.

== When negation is used ==

When the verb is negated there must always find a negative particle (like ''mu'' or ''ma''). If not the sentence is ungrammatical as shown below:

<gl>
\gll *gis-wissugwatige-w
can-cook.1-NEG
\trans I cannot cook (intended meaning)
</gl>

The only form of the above sentence must be:

<gl>
\gll ma gis-wissugwatige-w
NEG can-cook.1-NEG
\trans I cannot cook
</gl>

Thus it is seen that ''ma'' comes before the verb, now making the sentence grammatical.

''ma'' always precedes the future tense AND when the ''gis'' prefix is attached to the verb conjugated in the present for example:

<gl>
\gll ma gis-amalga-w-g
NEG can-dance-NEG-3
\trans s/he cannot dance
</gl>

There are some expressions that always take the negative form of the verb such as ''me menga'' (not yet) and ''mowen'' (nobody) that take the negative form of the verb: (examples from [http://www.mikmaqonline.org/ Mi'gmaq Online Dictionary])

<gl>
\gll me menag newt ajetten-u-g
NEG yet one time-NEG-3
\trans it is not one o’clock yet
</gl>

<gl>
\gll mo-wen mijie-w-g
NEG-who eat-NEG-3
\trans no one is eating
</gl>

<gl>
\gll moqwa' goqwei eign-u-g
no thing be-NEG-3
\trans there is nothing there
</gl>

Below is a list of common particles after which the negated form is used. This list is not complete but these are the most common forms.

{| class="wikitable"
! Particle || When used || Translation
|-
| ''mu''
| before negated present and past
| not
|-
| ''mutt''
| before negated imperative
| do not
|-
| ''lpa mu''
| before negated present and past
| not even
|-
| ''mowen''
| before negated present, past and future
| no one/nobody
|-
| ''moqwa' goqwei'''
| before negated present, past and future
| nothing
|-
| ''me menag''
| before negated verb
| not yet
|-
| ''ma''
| before negated future verb and preverb ''gis'' (can)
| not
|-
|}

''moqwa' goqwei'' is also spelled ''mu goqwei'' and a variant of this is ''mu'' + negated verb + ''goqwei'' when used in object position. It is inanimate. As in the following example:

<gl>
\gll mu malqutem-u goqwei
NEG eat.1>0-NEG what
\trans I eat nothing
</gl>

== Negative Concord ==
As can be seen above, Mi'gmaq is a negative concord language. Negative concord is where "double or multiple negative[s] [do] not express an affirmative but a negative" (van der Wouden & Zwarts, 1992). This is similar to French ''Je n'ai vue personne'' 'I have seen nobody' where both the ''ne'' and ''personne'' are both negative but the resulting sentence is negative, rather than each cancelling the other out resulting in a affirmative sentence, i.e. 'I have seen someone'. Mi'gmaq has negation marked in two places with both negative particles, i.e. ''mu'' & ''ma'', and a negative conjugation of the verb, i.e. with ''-u'' or ''-w'' added. Compare examples <glr id="1"/> and <glr id="2"/>.

<gl id="1">
\gll lpa'tuj eigu-p
boy be.there.PST-SG
\trans the boy was there
</gl>

<gl id="2">
\gll lpa'tuj mu eimu-g-u-p
boy NEG be.there-PST-NEG-SG
\trans the boy was not there
</gl>

= Word Order =
The negative particle (or possibly affix) ''mu'' always appears before the verb it negates. Although words can intervene between ''mu'' and the verb it negates, ''mu'' must always precede the verb.

<gl>
\gll Mali mu amal-gag-u-p
Mali NEG dance-PAST-NEG-SG
\trans Mali did not dance
</gl>

<gl>
\gll mu Mali amal-gag-u-p
NEG Mali dance-PAST-NEG-SG
\trans Mali did not dance
</gl>

Placement of ''mu'' post-verbally results in ungrammaticality, as illustrated below.

<gl>
\gll lpa'tuj mu eimug-u-p
boy NEG be.there.PST-NEG-SG
\trans the boy was not there
</gl>

Acceptable word orders:
*mu eimugup lpa'tuj
*mu lpa'tuj eimugup

Unacceptable word orders:
* *eimugup lpa'tuj mu
* *eimugup mu lpa'tuj
* *lpa'tuj eimugup mu

Furthermore, with regards to word order, it appears that negation must come right before the constituent it negates. Here is an example sentence without negation:

<gl>
\gll ula na lpa'tuj ta'n egitgup wigatign
this DEM boy that read.PST book
\trans this is the boy that read the book
</gl>

If we want to negate the first clause, as to say "This is '''not''' the boy that read the book", negation must directly precede 'boy'.

<gl>
\gll ula na mu lpa'tuj ta'n egitgup wigatign
this DEM NEG boy that read.PST book
\trans this is not the boy that read the book
</gl>

The following word orders for negation in the first clause are impossible:
* *ula na lpa'tuj mu...
* *ula mu na lpa'tuj...
* *mu ula na lpa'tuj...

If we want to negate the second clause, as to say "This is the boy that did '''not''' read the book", the word order may be varied, as long as negation comes before the verb (as discussed previously).

== Scope of Negation ==
As stated above, ''mu'' always comes before the verb. There may be particles that intrude between ''mu'' and the negated verb, but as long as ''mu'' comes before the negated verb, the structure is grammatical. [http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED136614.pdf Micmac Grammar, 1976] Sometimes the meaning of the sentence can change depending on the position of ''mu''.

<gl>
\gll egjitm Mali mu amal-gag-u-p
possible Mali NEG dance-PST-NEG-SG
\trans it is true that Mali did not dance
</gl>

<gl>
\gll mu egjitm Mali amal-gag-u-p
NEG possible Mali dance-PST.NEG.SG
\trans it is not true that Mali danced
</gl>

We would also expect phrases with adverb-like particles translatable as "it is possible" or "it is true" or "it is obvious" would also vary regarding negation.

=Language change and negation=
Often I was not able to elicit both the dual and plural forms of a verb. There are many times when I could only elicit the dual form, or times when the dual and plural forms were the same. It has been noted by our consultants that younger speakers are not using the plural forms but are using the dual form to mean both dual and plural. This seems be a language change happening currently in the speech community where the younger generation is leading the change. As noted in the paradigm above for 'eat' in the negated present tense, both dual and plural forms are the same. Here it seems that the plural form is used for both dual and plural meanings. This would strongly suggest a change happening in the speech community.

=References=
Clark, Jeremiah S. "A Dictionary of the Micmac Language." Rand's Micmac Dictionary. Charlottetown, PEI: The Patriot Publishing Company, 1902. Print.

Delisle, Gill L., and Manny L. Metallic. Micmac Teaching Grammar. Ecowi, QC: Thunderbird Press, 1976. Print.

L'Abbe Maillard, M. Grammaire De La Langue Mikmaque. New York: Presse Cramoisy de Jean-Marie Shea, 1864. Print.

Metallic, Janine. "Mi'gmaq Elicitation Session for Field Methods of Linguistics." Ed. Class, Carol Little and LING415. Montreal, QC: n/a, 2011. Print.

Payne, Thomas Edward. Describing Morphosyntax: a Guide for Field Linguists. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge UP, 2008. Print.

Paul-Martin, Patsy. "Mi'kmaq Verb Conjugation." Ed. Orthography, Mi'kmaq Talking Posters Smith/Francis. Truto, NS: Eastern Woodland Print Communications, 2011. Print.

Proulx, Paul. "Proto-Algonquian Verb Inflection." Studies in Native American Languages 15.2 (1990): 100-45. Print.

van der Wouden, Ton, and Frans Zwarts. "Negative Concord." D. Gilbers and S. Looyenga (eds), Language and Cognition 2. Yearbook 1992 Linguistic Theory and Knowledge Representation of the University of Groningen (1992): 317-31. Print.

Negation

2014-08-07T18:20:00Z

Carol: /* Transitive */

=Introduction=
Negation is the process of turning affirmative statements into the opposite form. For example, the negative equivalent of affirmative sentence, ''I am eating'' is ''I am not eating''. In English there are a few processes at work. ''not'' must always come with an auxiliary verb like the verb 'to have' and 'to be'. In Mi'gmaq, with its extremely detailed and expansive verb conjugations in the present, it is not surprising that the negated conjugation of verbs is just as detailed and expansive as they are in the affirmative.

To start off any commentary on negation, it seems fitting to start of with the word "no" which is ''moqwa'' in Mi'gmaq. (The opposite of this is ''e'e'' , meaning "yes".) Negation in Mi'gmaq is similar to that of Obijwe in that there is both an affix that occurs between the verb and the person marker and a word that comes before the verb denoting negation. See [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ojibwe_grammar#Verbs Verb Conjugation in Ojibwe]. The Mi'gmaq negated affix is ''w'' or ''u'' which is very closely related to the Proto-Algonquian form for negation which is is ''*-w'' ( [http://kuscholarworks.ku.edu/dspace/bitstream/1808/440/1/ling.wp.v15.n2.paper6.pdf Proulx, 1990] ). ''w'' or ''u'' are very closely related phonetically since ''w'' is the semivowel corresponding to the vowel ''u''. Bear in mind that during the elicitation sessions, sometimes it was unsure whether to use ''w'' or ''u''.

Negation in Mi'gmaq consists of adding ''mu'' or ''ma'' then the verb conjugated in the negated verb form. After ''mu'' or ''ma'' the verb must always contain a negative particle. We must think of these two things as inseparable. ''mu'' always comes before the negative conjugated verb in the present or past, and ''ma'' always comes before future or if the prefix ''gis'' ('can', 'to be able to') is attached to the verb. All other prefixes abide by the rules ''mu'' before present or past and ''ma'' before future. There are other particles that take the negated form of the verb, but it is obvious that these particles express a negated idea.

Please note as well that in some of the studies on Mi'gmaq and Algonquian languages the term 'nonaffirmative' is used to describe the negated form. For consistency in this report, I will use the term 'negated' to indicate the form of the verb which is the opposite of affirmative. 'Nonaffirmative' and 'negated' however refer to the same process of negation.

= Conjugation of the Negated Verb =
I have selected the verb ''mijji'' (to eat). Please note that some resources spell this like ''mijji'' where other spell it ''miji'' ([http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED136614.pdf Micmac Teaching Grammar, 1976]). I have selected the spelling from [http://www.mikmaqonline.org/servlet/dictionaryFrameSet.html?arg0=mijjit&method=searchFromMikmaq the Migmaq talking dictionary]. It is also important to note that the Micmac Teaching Grammar uses an orthography that is different of all other orthographies used with Mi'gmaq. I will indicate which terms they are and give the Listuguj equivalent orthographical manner of writing them.

The simplified formula for the conjugation in the negated form: the base form + ''u'' or ''w'' + person ending ([http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED136614.pdf Micmac Teaching Grammar, 1976])
The base form for intransitive verbs is always the verb in the first person singular. For example I eat is ''mijji''. Now to create the second person singular we add the ending -''n'' denoting second person singular and get the form ''mijjin''. For another type of verb (henceforth referred to as the ''a'' verbs) we take the base form ''amalga-'' and add -''n'' to get ''amalgan'' (you dance) and to get the first person singular we add -''i''. Please note that it has been hypothesized that there are at least eleven different conjugations. We will only be dealing with a couple here. Because of reasons of time limitation, I was not able to elicit all eleven types but when there is a difference in conjugation, that will be noted. Note that in the plural the ''u'' or ''w'' comes after ''-ulti-''. This could be due the the fact that ''-ulti-'' is the plural affix that attaches to the base form of the verb and does not convey anything about the tense of the verb, rather it is used to denote that the verb is plural. Thus the ''u'' or ''w'' comes right before the tense marker which is always at the end of the verb. For the first person singular in present there is a null tense marker at the end of some verbs (for example the ''-i'' verbs) thus the negative marker is at the end.

== Present Tense ==
First is a comparison of the affirmative and negated paradigms of the verb ''mijji'' ('eat').

{| class="wikitable"
|+ mijji- 'eat'
|-
! scope="col" colspan="2"| ↓person / number→
! scope="col" | SG
! scope="col" | DU
! scope="col" | PL
|-
! scope="row" rowspan="2"| 1
! scope="row"| 13
| rowspan="2" | mijji
|mijjieg
|mijjultieg
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| mijji'gw
| mijjulti'gw
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2" | 2
| mijjin
| mijjioq
| mijjultioq
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2"| 3
| mijjit
| mijjijig
| mijjultijig
|-
|}

{| class="wikitable"
|+ mu mijji- 'not eat'
|-
! scope="col" colspan="2"| ↓person / number→
! scope="col" | SG
! scope="col" | DU
! scope="col" | PL
|-
! scope="row" rowspan="2"| 1
! scope="row"| 13
| rowspan="2" | mu mijjiw
| mu mijjiweg
| mu mijjultiweg
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| mu mijjigw
| mu mijjultigw
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2" | 2
| mu mijjiun
| mu mijjiwoq
| mu mijjultiwoq
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2"| 3
| mu mijjigw
| mu mijji'gw
| mu mijjulti'gw
|-
|}

The word ''mu'' signifies negation. When ''mu'' is in front of the verb, the verb must also be conjugated in the negative form. In the above table we see the intrusion of the sound ''u'', ''ew'' or ''w''. The following table illustrates the endings for the present negative tense, keeping in mind ''mu'' must ALWAYS come right before the negated verb. When ''mu'' precedes a verb it must ALWAYS be in the negated form.

Below is a table that summarizes the VAI -i stem negative person endings in present conjugation. Inanimate [IN] conjugation was taken from the Micmac Grammar (1976, pg 155).

{| class="wikitable"
|+ VAI -i stem negative present person endings
|-
! scope="col" colspan="2"| ↓person / number→
! scope="col" | SG
! scope="col" | DU
! scope="col" | PL
|-
! scope="row" rowspan="2"| 1
! scope="row"| 13
| rowspan="2" |-u
| -ultieweg
| -ultieweg
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| -ultieweg
| -ultieweg
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2" | 2
| -un
| -woq
| -uwoq
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2"| 3.AN
| -ug
| -ewg
| -ultiewg
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2"| 3.IN
| -nug
| -nugel
| -nultinugel
|-
|}

The forms for the first person dual and plural in the exclusive and inclusive forms are the same. As shown by other data, the dual form seems to be in the process of disappearing. This is one such example where the dual form does not exist for the plural first person. Some younger speakers do not use the dual form at all so it is not surprising that we find a gap in the dual form here. All this is according to the speaker but if we followed the pattern of the previous forms we would expect the dual form for the inclusive and exclusive first person to be ''-ieweg''. "When the verb is negated, then the -g third person is ALWAYS found" (Micmac Grammar, 1976 pg 93).

Below is a comparison of different verbs to give an idea of how to conjugate different types of verbs in the negated form. All forms are conjugated in the present singular third person animate. The form of -''elie-'' was taken from Micmac Grammar (pg 155). For more detail about these forms see [[VAI]].

{| class="wikitable"
! VAI stem || Base Form || Gloss || Affirmative || Gloss || Negated || Gloss
|-
| -i
| mijji-
| eat
| mijjit
| s/he eats
| mu mijjigw
| s/he does not eat
|-
| -a
| amalga-
| dance
| amalgat
| s/he dances
| mu amalgagw
| s/he does not dance
|-
| -a'si
| ala'si-
| go around
| ala'sit
| s/he goes around
| mu ala'sigw
| s/he does not go around
|-
| -e
| elie-
| go
| eliet
| s/he goes
| mu eliegw
| s/he does not go
|-
|}

For verb conjugations in the affirmative please see [http://firstnationhelp.com/ali/posters/pdf/verb_conjugation.pdf Mi'kmaq Verb Conjugation]. As you can see, this site uses the verb ''mijisi'' meaning 'to eat'. In Listuguj this is not used as the word for to eat because it sounds too close for the verb ''mejisi'' 'to excrete'.

=== Transitive ===
Below is the conjugation in present of a transitive verb that takes an inanimate object.

{| class="wikitable" style="text-align:center"
|+ VTI Conjugation Class 1: -m class
|-
! scope="col" | ↓subject / object→
! scope="col" | 0SG
! scope="col" | 0PL
|-
! scope="row" | 1
| malqutm
| malqutmann
|-
! scope="row" | 13
| malqutmeg
| malqutmegl
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| malqutmu'g
| malqutmu'gul
|-
! scope="row" | 2
| malqutmn
| malqutmnn
|-
! scope="row" | 2PL
| malqutmoq
| malqutmoqol
|-
! scope="row" | 3
| malqutmeg
| malqutmegl
|-
! scope="row" | 3PL
| malqutmi'tij
| malqutmi'titl
|}

{| class="wikitable" style="text-align:center"
|+ VTI Negative Conjugation Class 1: -m class
|-
! scope="col" | ↓subject / object→
! scope="col" | 0SG
! scope="col" | 0PL
|-
! scope="row" | 1
| mu malqutmu
| mu malqutmuann
|-
! scope="row" | 13
| mu malqutmueg
| mu malqutmuegl
|-
! scope="row" | 12
|
|
|-
! scope="row" | 2
| mu malqutmu'n
| mu malqutmu'nn
|-
! scope="row" | 2PL
| mu malqutmuoq
| mu malqutmuoqol
|-
! scope="row" | 3
| mu malqutmug
| mu malqutmugul
|-
! scope="row" | 3PL
| mu malqutmi'tigw
| mu malqutmi'tigul
|-
|}

{| class="wikitable" style="text-align:center"
|+ VTI Negative Conjugation Class 1: -m class
|-
! scope="col" | ↓subject / object→
! scope="col" | 0SG
! scope="col" | 0PL
|-
! scope="row" | 1
| -mu
| -muann
|-
! scope="row" | 13
| -mueg
| -muegl
|-
! scope="row" | 12
|
|
|-
! scope="row" | 2
| -mu'n
| -mu'nn
|-
! scope="row" | 2PL
| -muoq
| -muoqol
|-
! scope="row" | 3
| -mug
| -mugl
|-
! scope="row" | 3PL
| -mu'tiwgw
| -mu'tiwgwl
|-
|}

== Imperative ==
Here is the formation of the affirmative imperative:
{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijji-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 2 Second person
| mijji
| ?
| mijjultiug
|-
|}

Now we compare it to the negated:
{| class="wikitable"
! ''mutt mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 2 Second person
| mutt mijjiew
| ?
| mutt mijjultineu
|-
|}

== Past Tense ==
Again for the past we compare the past and the negated past.

{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| mijjiap
| mijjieg'p
| mijjultieg'p
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| mijjiewg'p
| mijjultiewg'p
|-
| 2 Second person
| mijjit'p
| mijjiqop
| mijjultioqop
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| mijjip
| mijjpni'g
| mijjultpni'g
|}

Now let us look at the negated forms.

{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| mu mijjiewap
| mu mijjiewg'p
| mu mijjiewg'p
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| mu mijjiewg'p
| mu mijjiewg'p
|-
| 2 Second person
| mu mijjiewt'p
| mu mijjiewwaq'p
| mu mijjiewwaq'p
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| mu mijjug'p
| ?
| ?
|}

Thus this would be the conjugation of the negated form:

{| class="wikitable"
! Negated Past||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| -ewap
| -ewg'p
| -ewg'p
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| -ewg'p
| -ewg'p
|-
| 2 Second person
| -ewt'p
| -ewwaq'p
| -ewwaq'p
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| -ug'p
| ?
| ?
|}

For the third person the -''ug'p'' can change to -''ewgp'' for example:

<gl>
\gll Mu alasi-ew-g'p
not go-NEG-SG.PAST
\trans She didn't go
</gl>

== Future Tense ==
First let us compare the affirmative tense for eat:

{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| mijjias
| ?
| mijjit'snen
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
|
| mijjit'snu
|-
| 2 Second person
| mijjit's(g)
| ?
| mijjitoqs'p
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| mijjitew
| ''n/a''
| mijjultitaq
|}
I was not able to elicit dual forms.

We compare the future affirmative with the negated below:

{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| ma mijjiew
| ma mijjiug
| ma mijjiug
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| ma mijjiug
| ma mijjiug
|-
| 2 Second person
| ma mijjiwn
| ?
| ?
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| ma mijjiewg
| ''n/a''
| ma mijjultiewoq
|}
NOTE: In the future the ''mu'' changes to ''ma'' !! Like ''mu'', ''ma'' must always come before the verb conjugated in the negative future.
The correspondent was not able to produce a dual form in the future.

Now here is a paradigm of the negated endings in the future.

{| class="wikitable"
! Negated Future||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| -ew
| -ug
| -ug
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| -ug
| -ug
|-
| 2 Second person
| -iwn
| ?
| ?
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| -ewg
| ''n/a''
| -ultiwoq
|}

As you may have noticed the future tense is easy! The verbs take the same endings as the negated present tense but the ''mu'' is replaced with ''ma'' thus indicating future.

== When negation is used ==

When the verb is negated there must always find a negative particle (like ''mu'' or ''ma''). If not the sentence is ungrammatical as shown below:

<gl>
\gll *gis-wissugwatige-w
can-cook.1-NEG
\trans I cannot cook (intended meaning)
</gl>

The only form of the above sentence must be:

<gl>
\gll ma gis-wissugwatige-w
NEG can-cook.1-NEG
\trans I cannot cook
</gl>

Thus it is seen that ''ma'' comes before the verb, now making the sentence grammatical.

''ma'' always precedes the future tense AND when the ''gis'' prefix is attached to the verb conjugated in the present for example:

<gl>
\gll ma gis-amalga-w-g
NEG can-dance-NEG-3
\trans s/he cannot dance
</gl>

There are some expressions that always take the negative form of the verb such as ''me menga'' (not yet) and ''mowen'' (nobody) that take the negative form of the verb: (examples from [http://www.mikmaqonline.org/ Mi'gmaq Online Dictionary])

<gl>
\gll me menag newt ajetten-u-g
NEG yet one time-NEG-3
\trans it is not one o’clock yet
</gl>

<gl>
\gll mo-wen mijie-w-g
NEG-who eat-NEG-3
\trans no one is eating
</gl>

<gl>
\gll moqwa' goqwei eign-u-g
no thing be-NEG-3
\trans there is nothing there
</gl>

Below is a list of common particles after which the negated form is used. This list is not complete but these are the most common forms.

{| class="wikitable"
! Particle || When used || Translation
|-
| ''mu''
| before negated present and past
| not
|-
| ''mutt''
| before negated imperative
| do not
|-
| ''lpa mu''
| before negated present and past
| not even
|-
| ''mowen''
| before negated present, past and future
| no one/nobody
|-
| ''moqwa' goqwei'''
| before negated present, past and future
| nothing
|-
| ''me menag''
| before negated verb
| not yet
|-
| ''ma''
| before negated future verb and preverb ''gis'' (can)
| not
|-
|}

''moqwa' goqwei'' is also spelled ''mu goqwei'' and a variant of this is ''mu'' + negated verb + ''goqwei'' when used in object position. It is inanimate. As in the following example:

<gl>
\gll mu malqutem-u goqwei
NEG eat.1>0-NEG what
\trans I eat nothing
</gl>

== Negative Concord ==
As can be seen above, Mi'gmaq is a negative concord language. Negative concord is where "double or multiple negative[s] [do] not express an affirmative but a negative" (van der Wouden & Zwarts, 1992). This is similar to French ''Je n'ai vue personne'' 'I have seen nobody' where both the ''ne'' and ''personne'' are both negative but the resulting sentence is negative, rather than each cancelling the other out resulting in a affirmative sentence, i.e. 'I have seen someone'. Mi'gmaq has negation marked in two places with both negative particles, i.e. ''mu'' & ''ma'', and a negative conjugation of the verb, i.e. with ''-u'' or ''-w'' added. Compare examples <glr id="1"/> and <glr id="2"/>.

<gl id="1">
\gll lpa'tuj eigu-p
boy be.there.PST-SG
\trans the boy was there
</gl>

<gl id="2">
\gll lpa'tuj mu eimu-g-u-p
boy NEG be.there-PST-NEG-SG
\trans the boy was not there
</gl>

= Word Order =
The negative particle (or possibly affix) ''mu'' always appears before the verb it negates. Although words can intervene between ''mu'' and the verb it negates, ''mu'' must always precede the verb.

<gl>
\gll Mali mu amal-gag-u-p
Mali NEG dance-PAST-NEG-SG
\trans Mali did not dance
</gl>

<gl>
\gll mu Mali amal-gag-u-p
NEG Mali dance-PAST-NEG-SG
\trans Mali did not dance
</gl>

Placement of ''mu'' post-verbally results in ungrammaticality, as illustrated below.

<gl>
\gll lpa'tuj mu eimug-u-p
boy NEG be.there.PST-NEG-SG
\trans the boy was not there
</gl>

Acceptable word orders:
*mu eimugup lpa'tuj
*mu lpa'tuj eimugup

Unacceptable word orders:
* *eimugup lpa'tuj mu
* *eimugup mu lpa'tuj
* *lpa'tuj eimugup mu

Furthermore, with regards to word order, it appears that negation must come right before the constituent it negates. Here is an example sentence without negation:

<gl>
\gll ula na lpa'tuj ta'n egitgup wigatign
this DEM boy that read.PST book
\trans this is the boy that read the book
</gl>

If we want to negate the first clause, as to say "This is '''not''' the boy that read the book", negation must directly precede 'boy'.

<gl>
\gll ula na mu lpa'tuj ta'n egitgup wigatign
this DEM NEG boy that read.PST book
\trans this is not the boy that read the book
</gl>

The following word orders for negation in the first clause are impossible:
* *ula na lpa'tuj mu...
* *ula mu na lpa'tuj...
* *mu ula na lpa'tuj...

If we want to negate the second clause, as to say "This is the boy that did '''not''' read the book", the word order may be varied, as long as negation comes before the verb (as discussed previously).

== Scope of Negation ==
As stated above, ''mu'' always comes before the verb. There may be particles that intrude between ''mu'' and the negated verb, but as long as ''mu'' comes before the negated verb, the structure is grammatical. [http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED136614.pdf Micmac Grammar, 1976] Sometimes the meaning of the sentence can change depending on the position of ''mu''.

<gl>
\gll egjitm Mali mu amal-gag-u-p
possible Mali NEG dance-PST-NEG-SG
\trans it is true that Mali did not dance
</gl>

<gl>
\gll mu egjitm Mali amal-gag-u-p
NEG possible Mali dance-PST.NEG.SG
\trans it is not true that Mali danced
</gl>

We would also expect phrases with adverb-like particles translatable as "it is possible" or "it is true" or "it is obvious" would also vary regarding negation.

=Language change and negation=
Often I was not able to elicit both the dual and plural forms of a verb. There are many times when I could only elicit the dual form, or times when the dual and plural forms were the same. It has been noted by our consultants that younger speakers are not using the plural forms but are using the dual form to mean both dual and plural. This seems be a language change happening currently in the speech community where the younger generation is leading the change. As noted in the paradigm above for 'eat' in the negated present tense, both dual and plural forms are the same. Here it seems that the plural form is used for both dual and plural meanings. This would strongly suggest a change happening in the speech community.

=References=
Clark, Jeremiah S. "A Dictionary of the Micmac Language." Rand's Micmac Dictionary. Charlottetown, PEI: The Patriot Publishing Company, 1902. Print.

Delisle, Gill L., and Manny L. Metallic. Micmac Teaching Grammar. Ecowi, QC: Thunderbird Press, 1976. Print.

L'Abbe Maillard, M. Grammaire De La Langue Mikmaque. New York: Presse Cramoisy de Jean-Marie Shea, 1864. Print.

Metallic, Janine. "Mi'gmaq Elicitation Session for Field Methods of Linguistics." Ed. Class, Carol Little and LING415. Montreal, QC: n/a, 2011. Print.

Payne, Thomas Edward. Describing Morphosyntax: a Guide for Field Linguists. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge UP, 2008. Print.

Paul-Martin, Patsy. "Mi'kmaq Verb Conjugation." Ed. Orthography, Mi'kmaq Talking Posters Smith/Francis. Truto, NS: Eastern Woodland Print Communications, 2011. Print.

Proulx, Paul. "Proto-Algonquian Verb Inflection." Studies in Native American Languages 15.2 (1990): 100-45. Print.

van der Wouden, Ton, and Frans Zwarts. "Negative Concord." D. Gilbers and S. Looyenga (eds), Language and Cognition 2. Yearbook 1992 Linguistic Theory and Knowledge Representation of the University of Groningen (1992): 317-31. Print.

Negation

2014-08-07T18:14:37Z

Carol: /* Present Tense */

=Introduction=
Negation is the process of turning affirmative statements into the opposite form. For example, the negative equivalent of affirmative sentence, ''I am eating'' is ''I am not eating''. In English there are a few processes at work. ''not'' must always come with an auxiliary verb like the verb 'to have' and 'to be'. In Mi'gmaq, with its extremely detailed and expansive verb conjugations in the present, it is not surprising that the negated conjugation of verbs is just as detailed and expansive as they are in the affirmative.

To start off any commentary on negation, it seems fitting to start of with the word "no" which is ''moqwa'' in Mi'gmaq. (The opposite of this is ''e'e'' , meaning "yes".) Negation in Mi'gmaq is similar to that of Obijwe in that there is both an affix that occurs between the verb and the person marker and a word that comes before the verb denoting negation. See [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ojibwe_grammar#Verbs Verb Conjugation in Ojibwe]. The Mi'gmaq negated affix is ''w'' or ''u'' which is very closely related to the Proto-Algonquian form for negation which is is ''*-w'' ( [http://kuscholarworks.ku.edu/dspace/bitstream/1808/440/1/ling.wp.v15.n2.paper6.pdf Proulx, 1990] ). ''w'' or ''u'' are very closely related phonetically since ''w'' is the semivowel corresponding to the vowel ''u''. Bear in mind that during the elicitation sessions, sometimes it was unsure whether to use ''w'' or ''u''.

Negation in Mi'gmaq consists of adding ''mu'' or ''ma'' then the verb conjugated in the negated verb form. After ''mu'' or ''ma'' the verb must always contain a negative particle. We must think of these two things as inseparable. ''mu'' always comes before the negative conjugated verb in the present or past, and ''ma'' always comes before future or if the prefix ''gis'' ('can', 'to be able to') is attached to the verb. All other prefixes abide by the rules ''mu'' before present or past and ''ma'' before future. There are other particles that take the negated form of the verb, but it is obvious that these particles express a negated idea.

Please note as well that in some of the studies on Mi'gmaq and Algonquian languages the term 'nonaffirmative' is used to describe the negated form. For consistency in this report, I will use the term 'negated' to indicate the form of the verb which is the opposite of affirmative. 'Nonaffirmative' and 'negated' however refer to the same process of negation.

= Conjugation of the Negated Verb =
I have selected the verb ''mijji'' (to eat). Please note that some resources spell this like ''mijji'' where other spell it ''miji'' ([http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED136614.pdf Micmac Teaching Grammar, 1976]). I have selected the spelling from [http://www.mikmaqonline.org/servlet/dictionaryFrameSet.html?arg0=mijjit&method=searchFromMikmaq the Migmaq talking dictionary]. It is also important to note that the Micmac Teaching Grammar uses an orthography that is different of all other orthographies used with Mi'gmaq. I will indicate which terms they are and give the Listuguj equivalent orthographical manner of writing them.

The simplified formula for the conjugation in the negated form: the base form + ''u'' or ''w'' + person ending ([http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED136614.pdf Micmac Teaching Grammar, 1976])
The base form for intransitive verbs is always the verb in the first person singular. For example I eat is ''mijji''. Now to create the second person singular we add the ending -''n'' denoting second person singular and get the form ''mijjin''. For another type of verb (henceforth referred to as the ''a'' verbs) we take the base form ''amalga-'' and add -''n'' to get ''amalgan'' (you dance) and to get the first person singular we add -''i''. Please note that it has been hypothesized that there are at least eleven different conjugations. We will only be dealing with a couple here. Because of reasons of time limitation, I was not able to elicit all eleven types but when there is a difference in conjugation, that will be noted. Note that in the plural the ''u'' or ''w'' comes after ''-ulti-''. This could be due the the fact that ''-ulti-'' is the plural affix that attaches to the base form of the verb and does not convey anything about the tense of the verb, rather it is used to denote that the verb is plural. Thus the ''u'' or ''w'' comes right before the tense marker which is always at the end of the verb. For the first person singular in present there is a null tense marker at the end of some verbs (for example the ''-i'' verbs) thus the negative marker is at the end.

== Present Tense ==
First is a comparison of the affirmative and negated paradigms of the verb ''mijji'' ('eat').

{| class="wikitable"
|+ mijji- 'eat'
|-
! scope="col" colspan="2"| ↓person / number→
! scope="col" | SG
! scope="col" | DU
! scope="col" | PL
|-
! scope="row" rowspan="2"| 1
! scope="row"| 13
| rowspan="2" | mijji
|mijjieg
|mijjultieg
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| mijji'gw
| mijjulti'gw
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2" | 2
| mijjin
| mijjioq
| mijjultioq
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2"| 3
| mijjit
| mijjijig
| mijjultijig
|-
|}

{| class="wikitable"
|+ mu mijji- 'not eat'
|-
! scope="col" colspan="2"| ↓person / number→
! scope="col" | SG
! scope="col" | DU
! scope="col" | PL
|-
! scope="row" rowspan="2"| 1
! scope="row"| 13
| rowspan="2" | mu mijjiw
| mu mijjiweg
| mu mijjultiweg
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| mu mijjigw
| mu mijjultigw
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2" | 2
| mu mijjiun
| mu mijjiwoq
| mu mijjultiwoq
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2"| 3
| mu mijjigw
| mu mijji'gw
| mu mijjulti'gw
|-
|}

The word ''mu'' signifies negation. When ''mu'' is in front of the verb, the verb must also be conjugated in the negative form. In the above table we see the intrusion of the sound ''u'', ''ew'' or ''w''. The following table illustrates the endings for the present negative tense, keeping in mind ''mu'' must ALWAYS come right before the negated verb. When ''mu'' precedes a verb it must ALWAYS be in the negated form.

Below is a table that summarizes the VAI -i stem negative person endings in present conjugation. Inanimate [IN] conjugation was taken from the Micmac Grammar (1976, pg 155).

{| class="wikitable"
|+ VAI -i stem negative present person endings
|-
! scope="col" colspan="2"| ↓person / number→
! scope="col" | SG
! scope="col" | DU
! scope="col" | PL
|-
! scope="row" rowspan="2"| 1
! scope="row"| 13
| rowspan="2" |-u
| -ultieweg
| -ultieweg
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| -ultieweg
| -ultieweg
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2" | 2
| -un
| -woq
| -uwoq
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2"| 3.AN
| -ug
| -ewg
| -ultiewg
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2"| 3.IN
| -nug
| -nugel
| -nultinugel
|-
|}

The forms for the first person dual and plural in the exclusive and inclusive forms are the same. As shown by other data, the dual form seems to be in the process of disappearing. This is one such example where the dual form does not exist for the plural first person. Some younger speakers do not use the dual form at all so it is not surprising that we find a gap in the dual form here. All this is according to the speaker but if we followed the pattern of the previous forms we would expect the dual form for the inclusive and exclusive first person to be ''-ieweg''. "When the verb is negated, then the -g third person is ALWAYS found" (Micmac Grammar, 1976 pg 93).

Below is a comparison of different verbs to give an idea of how to conjugate different types of verbs in the negated form. All forms are conjugated in the present singular third person animate. The form of -''elie-'' was taken from Micmac Grammar (pg 155). For more detail about these forms see [[VAI]].

{| class="wikitable"
! VAI stem || Base Form || Gloss || Affirmative || Gloss || Negated || Gloss
|-
| -i
| mijji-
| eat
| mijjit
| s/he eats
| mu mijjigw
| s/he does not eat
|-
| -a
| amalga-
| dance
| amalgat
| s/he dances
| mu amalgagw
| s/he does not dance
|-
| -a'si
| ala'si-
| go around
| ala'sit
| s/he goes around
| mu ala'sigw
| s/he does not go around
|-
| -e
| elie-
| go
| eliet
| s/he goes
| mu eliegw
| s/he does not go
|-
|}

For verb conjugations in the affirmative please see [http://firstnationhelp.com/ali/posters/pdf/verb_conjugation.pdf Mi'kmaq Verb Conjugation]. As you can see, this site uses the verb ''mijisi'' meaning 'to eat'. In Listuguj this is not used as the word for to eat because it sounds too close for the verb ''mejisi'' 'to excrete'.

=== Transitive ===
Below is the conjugation in present of a transitive verb that takes an inanimate object.

{| class="wikitable" style="text-align:center"
|+ VTI Conjugation Class 1: -m class
|-
! scope="col" | ↓subject / object→
! scope="col" | 0SG
! scope="col" | 0PL
|-
! scope="row" | 1
| malqutm
| malqutmann
|-
! scope="row" | 13
| malqutmeg
| malqutmegl
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| malqutmu'gw
| malqutmu'gwl
|-
! scope="row" | 2
| malqutmn
| malqutmnn
|-
! scope="row" | 2PL
| malqutmoq
| malqutmoql
|-
! scope="row" | 3
| malqutem'g
| malqutem'gl
|-
! scope="row" | 3PL
| malqutmi'tij
| malqutemi'titl
|}

{| class="wikitable" style="text-align:center"
|+ VTI Negative Conjugation Class 1: -m class
|-
! scope="col" | ↓subject / object→
! scope="col" | 0SG
! scope="col" | 0PL
|-
! scope="row" | 1
| malqutmu
| malqutmuann
|-
! scope="row" | 13
| malqutmueg
| malqutmuegl
|-
! scope="row" | 12
|
|
|-
! scope="row" | 2
| malqutmu'n
| malqutmu'nn
|-
! scope="row" | 2PL
| malqutmuoq
| malqutmuoqol
|-
! scope="row" | 3
| malqutmug
| malqutmugl
|-
! scope="row" | 3PL
| malqutmu'tiwgw
| malqutmu'tiwgwl
|-
|}

{| class="wikitable" style="text-align:center"
|+ VTI Negative Conjugation Class 1: -m class
|-
! scope="col" | ↓subject / object→
! scope="col" | 0SG
! scope="col" | 0PL
|-
! scope="row" | 1
| -mu
| -muann
|-
! scope="row" | 13
| -mueg
| -muegl
|-
! scope="row" | 12
|
|
|-
! scope="row" | 2
| -mu'n
| -mu'nn
|-
! scope="row" | 2PL
| -muoq
| -muoqol
|-
! scope="row" | 3
| -mug
| -mugl
|-
! scope="row" | 3PL
| -mu'tiwgw
| -mu'tiwgwl
|-
|}

== Imperative ==
Here is the formation of the affirmative imperative:
{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijji-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 2 Second person
| mijji
| ?
| mijjultiug
|-
|}

Now we compare it to the negated:
{| class="wikitable"
! ''mutt mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 2 Second person
| mutt mijjiew
| ?
| mutt mijjultineu
|-
|}

== Past Tense ==
Again for the past we compare the past and the negated past.

{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| mijjiap
| mijjieg'p
| mijjultieg'p
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| mijjiewg'p
| mijjultiewg'p
|-
| 2 Second person
| mijjit'p
| mijjiqop
| mijjultioqop
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| mijjip
| mijjpni'g
| mijjultpni'g
|}

Now let us look at the negated forms.

{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| mu mijjiewap
| mu mijjiewg'p
| mu mijjiewg'p
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| mu mijjiewg'p
| mu mijjiewg'p
|-
| 2 Second person
| mu mijjiewt'p
| mu mijjiewwaq'p
| mu mijjiewwaq'p
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| mu mijjug'p
| ?
| ?
|}

Thus this would be the conjugation of the negated form:

{| class="wikitable"
! Negated Past||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| -ewap
| -ewg'p
| -ewg'p
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| -ewg'p
| -ewg'p
|-
| 2 Second person
| -ewt'p
| -ewwaq'p
| -ewwaq'p
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| -ug'p
| ?
| ?
|}

For the third person the -''ug'p'' can change to -''ewgp'' for example:

<gl>
\gll Mu alasi-ew-g'p
not go-NEG-SG.PAST
\trans She didn't go
</gl>

== Future Tense ==
First let us compare the affirmative tense for eat:

{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| mijjias
| ?
| mijjit'snen
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
|
| mijjit'snu
|-
| 2 Second person
| mijjit's(g)
| ?
| mijjitoqs'p
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| mijjitew
| ''n/a''
| mijjultitaq
|}
I was not able to elicit dual forms.

We compare the future affirmative with the negated below:

{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| ma mijjiew
| ma mijjiug
| ma mijjiug
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| ma mijjiug
| ma mijjiug
|-
| 2 Second person
| ma mijjiwn
| ?
| ?
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| ma mijjiewg
| ''n/a''
| ma mijjultiewoq
|}
NOTE: In the future the ''mu'' changes to ''ma'' !! Like ''mu'', ''ma'' must always come before the verb conjugated in the negative future.
The correspondent was not able to produce a dual form in the future.

Now here is a paradigm of the negated endings in the future.

{| class="wikitable"
! Negated Future||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| -ew
| -ug
| -ug
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| -ug
| -ug
|-
| 2 Second person
| -iwn
| ?
| ?
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| -ewg
| ''n/a''
| -ultiwoq
|}

As you may have noticed the future tense is easy! The verbs take the same endings as the negated present tense but the ''mu'' is replaced with ''ma'' thus indicating future.

== When negation is used ==

When the verb is negated there must always find a negative particle (like ''mu'' or ''ma''). If not the sentence is ungrammatical as shown below:

<gl>
\gll *gis-wissugwatige-w
can-cook.1-NEG
\trans I cannot cook (intended meaning)
</gl>

The only form of the above sentence must be:

<gl>
\gll ma gis-wissugwatige-w
NEG can-cook.1-NEG
\trans I cannot cook
</gl>

Thus it is seen that ''ma'' comes before the verb, now making the sentence grammatical.

''ma'' always precedes the future tense AND when the ''gis'' prefix is attached to the verb conjugated in the present for example:

<gl>
\gll ma gis-amalga-w-g
NEG can-dance-NEG-3
\trans s/he cannot dance
</gl>

There are some expressions that always take the negative form of the verb such as ''me menga'' (not yet) and ''mowen'' (nobody) that take the negative form of the verb: (examples from [http://www.mikmaqonline.org/ Mi'gmaq Online Dictionary])

<gl>
\gll me menag newt ajetten-u-g
NEG yet one time-NEG-3
\trans it is not one o’clock yet
</gl>

<gl>
\gll mo-wen mijie-w-g
NEG-who eat-NEG-3
\trans no one is eating
</gl>

<gl>
\gll moqwa' goqwei eign-u-g
no thing be-NEG-3
\trans there is nothing there
</gl>

Below is a list of common particles after which the negated form is used. This list is not complete but these are the most common forms.

{| class="wikitable"
! Particle || When used || Translation
|-
| ''mu''
| before negated present and past
| not
|-
| ''mutt''
| before negated imperative
| do not
|-
| ''lpa mu''
| before negated present and past
| not even
|-
| ''mowen''
| before negated present, past and future
| no one/nobody
|-
| ''moqwa' goqwei'''
| before negated present, past and future
| nothing
|-
| ''me menag''
| before negated verb
| not yet
|-
| ''ma''
| before negated future verb and preverb ''gis'' (can)
| not
|-
|}

''moqwa' goqwei'' is also spelled ''mu goqwei'' and a variant of this is ''mu'' + negated verb + ''goqwei'' when used in object position. It is inanimate. As in the following example:

<gl>
\gll mu malqutem-u goqwei
NEG eat.1>0-NEG what
\trans I eat nothing
</gl>

== Negative Concord ==
As can be seen above, Mi'gmaq is a negative concord language. Negative concord is where "double or multiple negative[s] [do] not express an affirmative but a negative" (van der Wouden & Zwarts, 1992). This is similar to French ''Je n'ai vue personne'' 'I have seen nobody' where both the ''ne'' and ''personne'' are both negative but the resulting sentence is negative, rather than each cancelling the other out resulting in a affirmative sentence, i.e. 'I have seen someone'. Mi'gmaq has negation marked in two places with both negative particles, i.e. ''mu'' & ''ma'', and a negative conjugation of the verb, i.e. with ''-u'' or ''-w'' added. Compare examples <glr id="1"/> and <glr id="2"/>.

<gl id="1">
\gll lpa'tuj eigu-p
boy be.there.PST-SG
\trans the boy was there
</gl>

<gl id="2">
\gll lpa'tuj mu eimu-g-u-p
boy NEG be.there-PST-NEG-SG
\trans the boy was not there
</gl>

= Word Order =
The negative particle (or possibly affix) ''mu'' always appears before the verb it negates. Although words can intervene between ''mu'' and the verb it negates, ''mu'' must always precede the verb.

<gl>
\gll Mali mu amal-gag-u-p
Mali NEG dance-PAST-NEG-SG
\trans Mali did not dance
</gl>

<gl>
\gll mu Mali amal-gag-u-p
NEG Mali dance-PAST-NEG-SG
\trans Mali did not dance
</gl>

Placement of ''mu'' post-verbally results in ungrammaticality, as illustrated below.

<gl>
\gll lpa'tuj mu eimug-u-p
boy NEG be.there.PST-NEG-SG
\trans the boy was not there
</gl>

Acceptable word orders:
*mu eimugup lpa'tuj
*mu lpa'tuj eimugup

Unacceptable word orders:
* *eimugup lpa'tuj mu
* *eimugup mu lpa'tuj
* *lpa'tuj eimugup mu

Furthermore, with regards to word order, it appears that negation must come right before the constituent it negates. Here is an example sentence without negation:

<gl>
\gll ula na lpa'tuj ta'n egitgup wigatign
this DEM boy that read.PST book
\trans this is the boy that read the book
</gl>

If we want to negate the first clause, as to say "This is '''not''' the boy that read the book", negation must directly precede 'boy'.

<gl>
\gll ula na mu lpa'tuj ta'n egitgup wigatign
this DEM NEG boy that read.PST book
\trans this is not the boy that read the book
</gl>

The following word orders for negation in the first clause are impossible:
* *ula na lpa'tuj mu...
* *ula mu na lpa'tuj...
* *mu ula na lpa'tuj...

If we want to negate the second clause, as to say "This is the boy that did '''not''' read the book", the word order may be varied, as long as negation comes before the verb (as discussed previously).

== Scope of Negation ==
As stated above, ''mu'' always comes before the verb. There may be particles that intrude between ''mu'' and the negated verb, but as long as ''mu'' comes before the negated verb, the structure is grammatical. [http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED136614.pdf Micmac Grammar, 1976] Sometimes the meaning of the sentence can change depending on the position of ''mu''.

<gl>
\gll egjitm Mali mu amal-gag-u-p
possible Mali NEG dance-PST-NEG-SG
\trans it is true that Mali did not dance
</gl>

<gl>
\gll mu egjitm Mali amal-gag-u-p
NEG possible Mali dance-PST.NEG.SG
\trans it is not true that Mali danced
</gl>

We would also expect phrases with adverb-like particles translatable as "it is possible" or "it is true" or "it is obvious" would also vary regarding negation.

=Language change and negation=
Often I was not able to elicit both the dual and plural forms of a verb. There are many times when I could only elicit the dual form, or times when the dual and plural forms were the same. It has been noted by our consultants that younger speakers are not using the plural forms but are using the dual form to mean both dual and plural. This seems be a language change happening currently in the speech community where the younger generation is leading the change. As noted in the paradigm above for 'eat' in the negated present tense, both dual and plural forms are the same. Here it seems that the plural form is used for both dual and plural meanings. This would strongly suggest a change happening in the speech community.

=References=
Clark, Jeremiah S. "A Dictionary of the Micmac Language." Rand's Micmac Dictionary. Charlottetown, PEI: The Patriot Publishing Company, 1902. Print.

Delisle, Gill L., and Manny L. Metallic. Micmac Teaching Grammar. Ecowi, QC: Thunderbird Press, 1976. Print.

L'Abbe Maillard, M. Grammaire De La Langue Mikmaque. New York: Presse Cramoisy de Jean-Marie Shea, 1864. Print.

Metallic, Janine. "Mi'gmaq Elicitation Session for Field Methods of Linguistics." Ed. Class, Carol Little and LING415. Montreal, QC: n/a, 2011. Print.

Payne, Thomas Edward. Describing Morphosyntax: a Guide for Field Linguists. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge UP, 2008. Print.

Paul-Martin, Patsy. "Mi'kmaq Verb Conjugation." Ed. Orthography, Mi'kmaq Talking Posters Smith/Francis. Truto, NS: Eastern Woodland Print Communications, 2011. Print.

Proulx, Paul. "Proto-Algonquian Verb Inflection." Studies in Native American Languages 15.2 (1990): 100-45. Print.

van der Wouden, Ton, and Frans Zwarts. "Negative Concord." D. Gilbers and S. Looyenga (eds), Language and Cognition 2. Yearbook 1992 Linguistic Theory and Knowledge Representation of the University of Groningen (1992): 317-31. Print.

Negation

2014-08-07T18:11:05Z

Carol: /* Present Tense */

=Introduction=
Negation is the process of turning affirmative statements into the opposite form. For example, the negative equivalent of affirmative sentence, ''I am eating'' is ''I am not eating''. In English there are a few processes at work. ''not'' must always come with an auxiliary verb like the verb 'to have' and 'to be'. In Mi'gmaq, with its extremely detailed and expansive verb conjugations in the present, it is not surprising that the negated conjugation of verbs is just as detailed and expansive as they are in the affirmative.

To start off any commentary on negation, it seems fitting to start of with the word "no" which is ''moqwa'' in Mi'gmaq. (The opposite of this is ''e'e'' , meaning "yes".) Negation in Mi'gmaq is similar to that of Obijwe in that there is both an affix that occurs between the verb and the person marker and a word that comes before the verb denoting negation. See [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ojibwe_grammar#Verbs Verb Conjugation in Ojibwe]. The Mi'gmaq negated affix is ''w'' or ''u'' which is very closely related to the Proto-Algonquian form for negation which is is ''*-w'' ( [http://kuscholarworks.ku.edu/dspace/bitstream/1808/440/1/ling.wp.v15.n2.paper6.pdf Proulx, 1990] ). ''w'' or ''u'' are very closely related phonetically since ''w'' is the semivowel corresponding to the vowel ''u''. Bear in mind that during the elicitation sessions, sometimes it was unsure whether to use ''w'' or ''u''.

Negation in Mi'gmaq consists of adding ''mu'' or ''ma'' then the verb conjugated in the negated verb form. After ''mu'' or ''ma'' the verb must always contain a negative particle. We must think of these two things as inseparable. ''mu'' always comes before the negative conjugated verb in the present or past, and ''ma'' always comes before future or if the prefix ''gis'' ('can', 'to be able to') is attached to the verb. All other prefixes abide by the rules ''mu'' before present or past and ''ma'' before future. There are other particles that take the negated form of the verb, but it is obvious that these particles express a negated idea.

Please note as well that in some of the studies on Mi'gmaq and Algonquian languages the term 'nonaffirmative' is used to describe the negated form. For consistency in this report, I will use the term 'negated' to indicate the form of the verb which is the opposite of affirmative. 'Nonaffirmative' and 'negated' however refer to the same process of negation.

= Conjugation of the Negated Verb =
I have selected the verb ''mijji'' (to eat). Please note that some resources spell this like ''mijji'' where other spell it ''miji'' ([http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED136614.pdf Micmac Teaching Grammar, 1976]). I have selected the spelling from [http://www.mikmaqonline.org/servlet/dictionaryFrameSet.html?arg0=mijjit&method=searchFromMikmaq the Migmaq talking dictionary]. It is also important to note that the Micmac Teaching Grammar uses an orthography that is different of all other orthographies used with Mi'gmaq. I will indicate which terms they are and give the Listuguj equivalent orthographical manner of writing them.

The simplified formula for the conjugation in the negated form: the base form + ''u'' or ''w'' + person ending ([http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED136614.pdf Micmac Teaching Grammar, 1976])
The base form for intransitive verbs is always the verb in the first person singular. For example I eat is ''mijji''. Now to create the second person singular we add the ending -''n'' denoting second person singular and get the form ''mijjin''. For another type of verb (henceforth referred to as the ''a'' verbs) we take the base form ''amalga-'' and add -''n'' to get ''amalgan'' (you dance) and to get the first person singular we add -''i''. Please note that it has been hypothesized that there are at least eleven different conjugations. We will only be dealing with a couple here. Because of reasons of time limitation, I was not able to elicit all eleven types but when there is a difference in conjugation, that will be noted. Note that in the plural the ''u'' or ''w'' comes after ''-ulti-''. This could be due the the fact that ''-ulti-'' is the plural affix that attaches to the base form of the verb and does not convey anything about the tense of the verb, rather it is used to denote that the verb is plural. Thus the ''u'' or ''w'' comes right before the tense marker which is always at the end of the verb. For the first person singular in present there is a null tense marker at the end of some verbs (for example the ''-i'' verbs) thus the negative marker is at the end.

== Present Tense ==
First is a comparison of the affirmative and negated paradigms of the verb ''mijji'' ('eat').

{| class="wikitable"
|+ mijji- 'eat'
|-
! scope="col" colspan="2"| ↓person / number→
! scope="col" | SG
! scope="col" | DU
! scope="col" | PL
|-
! scope="row" rowspan="2"| 1
! scope="row"| 13
| rowspan="2" | mijji
|mijjieg
|mijjultieg
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| mijji'gw
| mijjulti'gw
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2" | 2
| mijjin
| mijjioq
| mijjultioq
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2"| 3
| mijjit
| mijjijig
| mijjultijig
|-
|}

{| class="wikitable"
|+ mu mijji- 'not eat'
|-
! scope="col" colspan="2"| ↓person / number→
! scope="col" | SG
! scope="col" | DU
! scope="col" | PL
|-
! scope="row" rowspan="2"| 1
! scope="row"| 13
| rowspan="2" | mu mijjiw
| mu mijjiweg
| mu mijjultiweg
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| mu mijjigw
| mu mijjultigw
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2" | 2
| mu mijjiun
| mu mijjiwoq
| mu mijjultiwoq
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2"| 3
| mu mijjigw
| mu mijji'gw
| mu mijjulti'gw
|-
|}

The word ''mu'' signifies negation. When ''mu'' is in front of the verb, the verb must also be conjugated in the negative form. In the above table we see the intrusion of the sound ''u'', ''ew'' or ''w''. The following table illustrates the endings for the present negative tense, keeping in mind ''mu'' must ALWAYS come right before the negated verb. When ''mu'' precedes a verb it must ALWAYS be in the negated form.

Below is a table that summarizes the VAI -i stem negative person endings in present conjugation. Inanimate [IN] conjugation was taken from the Micmac Grammar (1976, pg 155).

{| class="wikitable"
|+ VAI -i stem negative present person endings
|-
! scope="col" colspan="2"| ↓person / number→
! scope="col" | SG
! scope="col" | DU
! scope="col" | PL
|-
! scope="row" rowspan="2"| 1
! scope="row"| 13
| rowspan="2" |-u
| -ultieweg
| -ultieweg
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| -ultieweg
| -ultieweg
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2" | 2
| -un
| -woq
| -uwoq
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2"| 3.AN
| -ug
| -ewg
| -ultiewg
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2"| 3.IN
| -nug
| -nugel
| -nultinugel
|-
|}

The forms for the first person dual and plural in the exclusive and inclusive forms are the same. As shown by other data, the dual form seems to be in the process of disappearing. This is one such example where the dual form does not exist for the plural first person. Some younger speakers do not use the dual form at all so it is not surprising that we find a gap in the dual form here. All this is according to the speaker but if we followed the pattern of the previous forms we would expect the dual form for the inclusive and exclusive first person to be ''-ieweg''. "When the verb is negated, then the -g third person is ALWAYS found" (Micmac Grammar, 1976 pg 93).

Below is a comparison of different verbs to give an idea of how to conjugate different types of verbs in the negated form. All forms are conjugated in the present singular third person animate. The form of -''elie-'' was taken from Micmac Grammar (pg 155). For more detail about these forms see [[VAI]].

{| class="wikitable"
! VAI stem || Base Form || Gloss || Affirmative || Gloss || Negated || Gloss
|-
| -i
| mijji-
| eat
| mijjit
| s/he eats
| mu mijjiug
| s/he does not eat
|-
| -a
| amalga-
| dance
| amalgat
| s/he dances
| mu amalgawg
| s/he does not dance
|-
| -asi
| alasi-
| go around
| alasit
| s/he goes around
| mu alasiewgw
| s/he does not go around
|-
| -e
| elie-
| go
| eliet
| s/he goes
| mu eliegw
| s/he does not go
|-
|}

For verb conjugations in the affirmative please see [http://firstnationhelp.com/ali/posters/pdf/verb_conjugation.pdf Mi'kmaq Verb Conjugation]. As you can see, this site uses the verb ''mijisi'' meaning 'to eat'. In Listuguj this is not used as the word for to eat because it sounds too close for the verb ''mejisi'' 'to excrete'.

=== Transitive ===
Below is the conjugation in present of a transitive verb that takes an inanimate object.

{| class="wikitable" style="text-align:center"
|+ VTI Conjugation Class 1: -m class
|-
! scope="col" | ↓subject / object→
! scope="col" | 0SG
! scope="col" | 0PL
|-
! scope="row" | 1
| malqutm
| malqutmann
|-
! scope="row" | 13
| malqutmeg
| malqutmegl
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| malqutmu'gw
| malqutmu'gwl
|-
! scope="row" | 2
| malqutmn
| malqutmnn
|-
! scope="row" | 2PL
| malqutmoq
| malqutmoql
|-
! scope="row" | 3
| malqutem'g
| malqutem'gl
|-
! scope="row" | 3PL
| malqutmi'tij
| malqutemi'titl
|}

{| class="wikitable" style="text-align:center"
|+ VTI Negative Conjugation Class 1: -m class
|-
! scope="col" | ↓subject / object→
! scope="col" | 0SG
! scope="col" | 0PL
|-
! scope="row" | 1
| malqutmu
| malqutmuann
|-
! scope="row" | 13
| malqutmueg
| malqutmuegl
|-
! scope="row" | 12
|
|
|-
! scope="row" | 2
| malqutmu'n
| malqutmu'nn
|-
! scope="row" | 2PL
| malqutmuoq
| malqutmuoqol
|-
! scope="row" | 3
| malqutmug
| malqutmugl
|-
! scope="row" | 3PL
| malqutmu'tiwgw
| malqutmu'tiwgwl
|-
|}

{| class="wikitable" style="text-align:center"
|+ VTI Negative Conjugation Class 1: -m class
|-
! scope="col" | ↓subject / object→
! scope="col" | 0SG
! scope="col" | 0PL
|-
! scope="row" | 1
| -mu
| -muann
|-
! scope="row" | 13
| -mueg
| -muegl
|-
! scope="row" | 12
|
|
|-
! scope="row" | 2
| -mu'n
| -mu'nn
|-
! scope="row" | 2PL
| -muoq
| -muoqol
|-
! scope="row" | 3
| -mug
| -mugl
|-
! scope="row" | 3PL
| -mu'tiwgw
| -mu'tiwgwl
|-
|}

== Imperative ==
Here is the formation of the affirmative imperative:
{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijji-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 2 Second person
| mijji
| ?
| mijjultiug
|-
|}

Now we compare it to the negated:
{| class="wikitable"
! ''mutt mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 2 Second person
| mutt mijjiew
| ?
| mutt mijjultineu
|-
|}

== Past Tense ==
Again for the past we compare the past and the negated past.

{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| mijjiap
| mijjieg'p
| mijjultieg'p
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| mijjiewg'p
| mijjultiewg'p
|-
| 2 Second person
| mijjit'p
| mijjiqop
| mijjultioqop
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| mijjip
| mijjpni'g
| mijjultpni'g
|}

Now let us look at the negated forms.

{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| mu mijjiewap
| mu mijjiewg'p
| mu mijjiewg'p
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| mu mijjiewg'p
| mu mijjiewg'p
|-
| 2 Second person
| mu mijjiewt'p
| mu mijjiewwaq'p
| mu mijjiewwaq'p
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| mu mijjug'p
| ?
| ?
|}

Thus this would be the conjugation of the negated form:

{| class="wikitable"
! Negated Past||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| -ewap
| -ewg'p
| -ewg'p
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| -ewg'p
| -ewg'p
|-
| 2 Second person
| -ewt'p
| -ewwaq'p
| -ewwaq'p
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| -ug'p
| ?
| ?
|}

For the third person the -''ug'p'' can change to -''ewgp'' for example:

<gl>
\gll Mu alasi-ew-g'p
not go-NEG-SG.PAST
\trans She didn't go
</gl>

== Future Tense ==
First let us compare the affirmative tense for eat:

{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| mijjias
| ?
| mijjit'snen
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
|
| mijjit'snu
|-
| 2 Second person
| mijjit's(g)
| ?
| mijjitoqs'p
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| mijjitew
| ''n/a''
| mijjultitaq
|}
I was not able to elicit dual forms.

We compare the future affirmative with the negated below:

{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| ma mijjiew
| ma mijjiug
| ma mijjiug
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| ma mijjiug
| ma mijjiug
|-
| 2 Second person
| ma mijjiwn
| ?
| ?
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| ma mijjiewg
| ''n/a''
| ma mijjultiewoq
|}
NOTE: In the future the ''mu'' changes to ''ma'' !! Like ''mu'', ''ma'' must always come before the verb conjugated in the negative future.
The correspondent was not able to produce a dual form in the future.

Now here is a paradigm of the negated endings in the future.

{| class="wikitable"
! Negated Future||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| -ew
| -ug
| -ug
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| -ug
| -ug
|-
| 2 Second person
| -iwn
| ?
| ?
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| -ewg
| ''n/a''
| -ultiwoq
|}

As you may have noticed the future tense is easy! The verbs take the same endings as the negated present tense but the ''mu'' is replaced with ''ma'' thus indicating future.

== When negation is used ==

When the verb is negated there must always find a negative particle (like ''mu'' or ''ma''). If not the sentence is ungrammatical as shown below:

<gl>
\gll *gis-wissugwatige-w
can-cook.1-NEG
\trans I cannot cook (intended meaning)
</gl>

The only form of the above sentence must be:

<gl>
\gll ma gis-wissugwatige-w
NEG can-cook.1-NEG
\trans I cannot cook
</gl>

Thus it is seen that ''ma'' comes before the verb, now making the sentence grammatical.

''ma'' always precedes the future tense AND when the ''gis'' prefix is attached to the verb conjugated in the present for example:

<gl>
\gll ma gis-amalga-w-g
NEG can-dance-NEG-3
\trans s/he cannot dance
</gl>

There are some expressions that always take the negative form of the verb such as ''me menga'' (not yet) and ''mowen'' (nobody) that take the negative form of the verb: (examples from [http://www.mikmaqonline.org/ Mi'gmaq Online Dictionary])

<gl>
\gll me menag newt ajetten-u-g
NEG yet one time-NEG-3
\trans it is not one o’clock yet
</gl>

<gl>
\gll mo-wen mijie-w-g
NEG-who eat-NEG-3
\trans no one is eating
</gl>

<gl>
\gll moqwa' goqwei eign-u-g
no thing be-NEG-3
\trans there is nothing there
</gl>

Below is a list of common particles after which the negated form is used. This list is not complete but these are the most common forms.

{| class="wikitable"
! Particle || When used || Translation
|-
| ''mu''
| before negated present and past
| not
|-
| ''mutt''
| before negated imperative
| do not
|-
| ''lpa mu''
| before negated present and past
| not even
|-
| ''mowen''
| before negated present, past and future
| no one/nobody
|-
| ''moqwa' goqwei'''
| before negated present, past and future
| nothing
|-
| ''me menag''
| before negated verb
| not yet
|-
| ''ma''
| before negated future verb and preverb ''gis'' (can)
| not
|-
|}

''moqwa' goqwei'' is also spelled ''mu goqwei'' and a variant of this is ''mu'' + negated verb + ''goqwei'' when used in object position. It is inanimate. As in the following example:

<gl>
\gll mu malqutem-u goqwei
NEG eat.1>0-NEG what
\trans I eat nothing
</gl>

== Negative Concord ==
As can be seen above, Mi'gmaq is a negative concord language. Negative concord is where "double or multiple negative[s] [do] not express an affirmative but a negative" (van der Wouden & Zwarts, 1992). This is similar to French ''Je n'ai vue personne'' 'I have seen nobody' where both the ''ne'' and ''personne'' are both negative but the resulting sentence is negative, rather than each cancelling the other out resulting in a affirmative sentence, i.e. 'I have seen someone'. Mi'gmaq has negation marked in two places with both negative particles, i.e. ''mu'' & ''ma'', and a negative conjugation of the verb, i.e. with ''-u'' or ''-w'' added. Compare examples <glr id="1"/> and <glr id="2"/>.

<gl id="1">
\gll lpa'tuj eigu-p
boy be.there.PST-SG
\trans the boy was there
</gl>

<gl id="2">
\gll lpa'tuj mu eimu-g-u-p
boy NEG be.there-PST-NEG-SG
\trans the boy was not there
</gl>

= Word Order =
The negative particle (or possibly affix) ''mu'' always appears before the verb it negates. Although words can intervene between ''mu'' and the verb it negates, ''mu'' must always precede the verb.

<gl>
\gll Mali mu amal-gag-u-p
Mali NEG dance-PAST-NEG-SG
\trans Mali did not dance
</gl>

<gl>
\gll mu Mali amal-gag-u-p
NEG Mali dance-PAST-NEG-SG
\trans Mali did not dance
</gl>

Placement of ''mu'' post-verbally results in ungrammaticality, as illustrated below.

<gl>
\gll lpa'tuj mu eimug-u-p
boy NEG be.there.PST-NEG-SG
\trans the boy was not there
</gl>

Acceptable word orders:
*mu eimugup lpa'tuj
*mu lpa'tuj eimugup

Unacceptable word orders:
* *eimugup lpa'tuj mu
* *eimugup mu lpa'tuj
* *lpa'tuj eimugup mu

Furthermore, with regards to word order, it appears that negation must come right before the constituent it negates. Here is an example sentence without negation:

<gl>
\gll ula na lpa'tuj ta'n egitgup wigatign
this DEM boy that read.PST book
\trans this is the boy that read the book
</gl>

If we want to negate the first clause, as to say "This is '''not''' the boy that read the book", negation must directly precede 'boy'.

<gl>
\gll ula na mu lpa'tuj ta'n egitgup wigatign
this DEM NEG boy that read.PST book
\trans this is not the boy that read the book
</gl>

The following word orders for negation in the first clause are impossible:
* *ula na lpa'tuj mu...
* *ula mu na lpa'tuj...
* *mu ula na lpa'tuj...

If we want to negate the second clause, as to say "This is the boy that did '''not''' read the book", the word order may be varied, as long as negation comes before the verb (as discussed previously).

== Scope of Negation ==
As stated above, ''mu'' always comes before the verb. There may be particles that intrude between ''mu'' and the negated verb, but as long as ''mu'' comes before the negated verb, the structure is grammatical. [http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED136614.pdf Micmac Grammar, 1976] Sometimes the meaning of the sentence can change depending on the position of ''mu''.

<gl>
\gll egjitm Mali mu amal-gag-u-p
possible Mali NEG dance-PST-NEG-SG
\trans it is true that Mali did not dance
</gl>

<gl>
\gll mu egjitm Mali amal-gag-u-p
NEG possible Mali dance-PST.NEG.SG
\trans it is not true that Mali danced
</gl>

We would also expect phrases with adverb-like particles translatable as "it is possible" or "it is true" or "it is obvious" would also vary regarding negation.

=Language change and negation=
Often I was not able to elicit both the dual and plural forms of a verb. There are many times when I could only elicit the dual form, or times when the dual and plural forms were the same. It has been noted by our consultants that younger speakers are not using the plural forms but are using the dual form to mean both dual and plural. This seems be a language change happening currently in the speech community where the younger generation is leading the change. As noted in the paradigm above for 'eat' in the negated present tense, both dual and plural forms are the same. Here it seems that the plural form is used for both dual and plural meanings. This would strongly suggest a change happening in the speech community.

=References=
Clark, Jeremiah S. "A Dictionary of the Micmac Language." Rand's Micmac Dictionary. Charlottetown, PEI: The Patriot Publishing Company, 1902. Print.

Delisle, Gill L., and Manny L. Metallic. Micmac Teaching Grammar. Ecowi, QC: Thunderbird Press, 1976. Print.

L'Abbe Maillard, M. Grammaire De La Langue Mikmaque. New York: Presse Cramoisy de Jean-Marie Shea, 1864. Print.

Metallic, Janine. "Mi'gmaq Elicitation Session for Field Methods of Linguistics." Ed. Class, Carol Little and LING415. Montreal, QC: n/a, 2011. Print.

Payne, Thomas Edward. Describing Morphosyntax: a Guide for Field Linguists. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge UP, 2008. Print.

Paul-Martin, Patsy. "Mi'kmaq Verb Conjugation." Ed. Orthography, Mi'kmaq Talking Posters Smith/Francis. Truto, NS: Eastern Woodland Print Communications, 2011. Print.

Proulx, Paul. "Proto-Algonquian Verb Inflection." Studies in Native American Languages 15.2 (1990): 100-45. Print.

van der Wouden, Ton, and Frans Zwarts. "Negative Concord." D. Gilbers and S. Looyenga (eds), Language and Cognition 2. Yearbook 1992 Linguistic Theory and Knowledge Representation of the University of Groningen (1992): 317-31. Print.

Negation

2014-08-07T18:10:39Z

Carol: /* Present Tense */

=Introduction=
Negation is the process of turning affirmative statements into the opposite form. For example, the negative equivalent of affirmative sentence, ''I am eating'' is ''I am not eating''. In English there are a few processes at work. ''not'' must always come with an auxiliary verb like the verb 'to have' and 'to be'. In Mi'gmaq, with its extremely detailed and expansive verb conjugations in the present, it is not surprising that the negated conjugation of verbs is just as detailed and expansive as they are in the affirmative.

To start off any commentary on negation, it seems fitting to start of with the word "no" which is ''moqwa'' in Mi'gmaq. (The opposite of this is ''e'e'' , meaning "yes".) Negation in Mi'gmaq is similar to that of Obijwe in that there is both an affix that occurs between the verb and the person marker and a word that comes before the verb denoting negation. See [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ojibwe_grammar#Verbs Verb Conjugation in Ojibwe]. The Mi'gmaq negated affix is ''w'' or ''u'' which is very closely related to the Proto-Algonquian form for negation which is is ''*-w'' ( [http://kuscholarworks.ku.edu/dspace/bitstream/1808/440/1/ling.wp.v15.n2.paper6.pdf Proulx, 1990] ). ''w'' or ''u'' are very closely related phonetically since ''w'' is the semivowel corresponding to the vowel ''u''. Bear in mind that during the elicitation sessions, sometimes it was unsure whether to use ''w'' or ''u''.

Negation in Mi'gmaq consists of adding ''mu'' or ''ma'' then the verb conjugated in the negated verb form. After ''mu'' or ''ma'' the verb must always contain a negative particle. We must think of these two things as inseparable. ''mu'' always comes before the negative conjugated verb in the present or past, and ''ma'' always comes before future or if the prefix ''gis'' ('can', 'to be able to') is attached to the verb. All other prefixes abide by the rules ''mu'' before present or past and ''ma'' before future. There are other particles that take the negated form of the verb, but it is obvious that these particles express a negated idea.

Please note as well that in some of the studies on Mi'gmaq and Algonquian languages the term 'nonaffirmative' is used to describe the negated form. For consistency in this report, I will use the term 'negated' to indicate the form of the verb which is the opposite of affirmative. 'Nonaffirmative' and 'negated' however refer to the same process of negation.

= Conjugation of the Negated Verb =
I have selected the verb ''mijji'' (to eat). Please note that some resources spell this like ''mijji'' where other spell it ''miji'' ([http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED136614.pdf Micmac Teaching Grammar, 1976]). I have selected the spelling from [http://www.mikmaqonline.org/servlet/dictionaryFrameSet.html?arg0=mijjit&method=searchFromMikmaq the Migmaq talking dictionary]. It is also important to note that the Micmac Teaching Grammar uses an orthography that is different of all other orthographies used with Mi'gmaq. I will indicate which terms they are and give the Listuguj equivalent orthographical manner of writing them.

The simplified formula for the conjugation in the negated form: the base form + ''u'' or ''w'' + person ending ([http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED136614.pdf Micmac Teaching Grammar, 1976])
The base form for intransitive verbs is always the verb in the first person singular. For example I eat is ''mijji''. Now to create the second person singular we add the ending -''n'' denoting second person singular and get the form ''mijjin''. For another type of verb (henceforth referred to as the ''a'' verbs) we take the base form ''amalga-'' and add -''n'' to get ''amalgan'' (you dance) and to get the first person singular we add -''i''. Please note that it has been hypothesized that there are at least eleven different conjugations. We will only be dealing with a couple here. Because of reasons of time limitation, I was not able to elicit all eleven types but when there is a difference in conjugation, that will be noted. Note that in the plural the ''u'' or ''w'' comes after ''-ulti-''. This could be due the the fact that ''-ulti-'' is the plural affix that attaches to the base form of the verb and does not convey anything about the tense of the verb, rather it is used to denote that the verb is plural. Thus the ''u'' or ''w'' comes right before the tense marker which is always at the end of the verb. For the first person singular in present there is a null tense marker at the end of some verbs (for example the ''-i'' verbs) thus the negative marker is at the end.

== Present Tense ==
First is a comparison of the affirmative and negated paradigms of the verb ''mijji'' ('eat').

{| class="wikitable"
|+ mijji- 'eat'
|-
! scope="col" colspan="2"| ↓person / number→
! scope="col" | SG
! scope="col" | DU
! scope="col" | PL
|-
! scope="row" rowspan="2"| 1
! scope="row"| 13
| rowspan="2" | mijji
|mijjieg
|mijjultieg
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| mijji'gw
| mijjulti'gw
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2" | 2
| mijjin
| mijjioq
| mijjultioq
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2"| 3
| mijjit
| mijjijig
| mijjultijig
|-
|}

{| class="wikitable"
|+ mu mijji- 'not eat'
|-
! scope="col" colspan="2"| ↓person / number→
! scope="col" | SG
! scope="col" | DU
! scope="col" | PL
|-
! scope="row" rowspan="2"| 1
! scope="row"| 13
| rowspan="2" | mu mijjiw
| mu mijjiweg
| mu mijjultiweg
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| mu mijjigw
| mu mijjultigw
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2" | 2
| mu mijjiun
| mu mijjiwoq
| mu mijjultiwoq
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2"| 3
| mu mijjigw
| mu mijji'gw
| mu mijjiulti'gw
|-
|}

The word ''mu'' signifies negation. When ''mu'' is in front of the verb, the verb must also be conjugated in the negative form. In the above table we see the intrusion of the sound ''u'', ''ew'' or ''w''. The following table illustrates the endings for the present negative tense, keeping in mind ''mu'' must ALWAYS come right before the negated verb. When ''mu'' precedes a verb it must ALWAYS be in the negated form.

Below is a table that summarizes the VAI -i stem negative person endings in present conjugation. Inanimate [IN] conjugation was taken from the Micmac Grammar (1976, pg 155).

{| class="wikitable"
|+ VAI -i stem negative present person endings
|-
! scope="col" colspan="2"| ↓person / number→
! scope="col" | SG
! scope="col" | DU
! scope="col" | PL
|-
! scope="row" rowspan="2"| 1
! scope="row"| 13
| rowspan="2" |-u
| -ultieweg
| -ultieweg
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| -ultieweg
| -ultieweg
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2" | 2
| -un
| -woq
| -uwoq
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2"| 3.AN
| -ug
| -ewg
| -ultiewg
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2"| 3.IN
| -nug
| -nugel
| -nultinugel
|-
|}

The forms for the first person dual and plural in the exclusive and inclusive forms are the same. As shown by other data, the dual form seems to be in the process of disappearing. This is one such example where the dual form does not exist for the plural first person. Some younger speakers do not use the dual form at all so it is not surprising that we find a gap in the dual form here. All this is according to the speaker but if we followed the pattern of the previous forms we would expect the dual form for the inclusive and exclusive first person to be ''-ieweg''. "When the verb is negated, then the -g third person is ALWAYS found" (Micmac Grammar, 1976 pg 93).

Below is a comparison of different verbs to give an idea of how to conjugate different types of verbs in the negated form. All forms are conjugated in the present singular third person animate. The form of -''elie-'' was taken from Micmac Grammar (pg 155). For more detail about these forms see [[VAI]].

{| class="wikitable"
! VAI stem || Base Form || Gloss || Affirmative || Gloss || Negated || Gloss
|-
| -i
| mijji-
| eat
| mijjit
| s/he eats
| mu mijjiug
| s/he does not eat
|-
| -a
| amalga-
| dance
| amalgat
| s/he dances
| mu amalgawg
| s/he does not dance
|-
| -asi
| alasi-
| go around
| alasit
| s/he goes around
| mu alasiewgw
| s/he does not go around
|-
| -e
| elie-
| go
| eliet
| s/he goes
| mu eliegw
| s/he does not go
|-
|}

For verb conjugations in the affirmative please see [http://firstnationhelp.com/ali/posters/pdf/verb_conjugation.pdf Mi'kmaq Verb Conjugation]. As you can see, this site uses the verb ''mijisi'' meaning 'to eat'. In Listuguj this is not used as the word for to eat because it sounds too close for the verb ''mejisi'' 'to excrete'.

=== Transitive ===
Below is the conjugation in present of a transitive verb that takes an inanimate object.

{| class="wikitable" style="text-align:center"
|+ VTI Conjugation Class 1: -m class
|-
! scope="col" | ↓subject / object→
! scope="col" | 0SG
! scope="col" | 0PL
|-
! scope="row" | 1
| malqutm
| malqutmann
|-
! scope="row" | 13
| malqutmeg
| malqutmegl
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| malqutmu'gw
| malqutmu'gwl
|-
! scope="row" | 2
| malqutmn
| malqutmnn
|-
! scope="row" | 2PL
| malqutmoq
| malqutmoql
|-
! scope="row" | 3
| malqutem'g
| malqutem'gl
|-
! scope="row" | 3PL
| malqutmi'tij
| malqutemi'titl
|}

{| class="wikitable" style="text-align:center"
|+ VTI Negative Conjugation Class 1: -m class
|-
! scope="col" | ↓subject / object→
! scope="col" | 0SG
! scope="col" | 0PL
|-
! scope="row" | 1
| malqutmu
| malqutmuann
|-
! scope="row" | 13
| malqutmueg
| malqutmuegl
|-
! scope="row" | 12
|
|
|-
! scope="row" | 2
| malqutmu'n
| malqutmu'nn
|-
! scope="row" | 2PL
| malqutmuoq
| malqutmuoqol
|-
! scope="row" | 3
| malqutmug
| malqutmugl
|-
! scope="row" | 3PL
| malqutmu'tiwgw
| malqutmu'tiwgwl
|-
|}

{| class="wikitable" style="text-align:center"
|+ VTI Negative Conjugation Class 1: -m class
|-
! scope="col" | ↓subject / object→
! scope="col" | 0SG
! scope="col" | 0PL
|-
! scope="row" | 1
| -mu
| -muann
|-
! scope="row" | 13
| -mueg
| -muegl
|-
! scope="row" | 12
|
|
|-
! scope="row" | 2
| -mu'n
| -mu'nn
|-
! scope="row" | 2PL
| -muoq
| -muoqol
|-
! scope="row" | 3
| -mug
| -mugl
|-
! scope="row" | 3PL
| -mu'tiwgw
| -mu'tiwgwl
|-
|}

== Imperative ==
Here is the formation of the affirmative imperative:
{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijji-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 2 Second person
| mijji
| ?
| mijjultiug
|-
|}

Now we compare it to the negated:
{| class="wikitable"
! ''mutt mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 2 Second person
| mutt mijjiew
| ?
| mutt mijjultineu
|-
|}

== Past Tense ==
Again for the past we compare the past and the negated past.

{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| mijjiap
| mijjieg'p
| mijjultieg'p
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| mijjiewg'p
| mijjultiewg'p
|-
| 2 Second person
| mijjit'p
| mijjiqop
| mijjultioqop
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| mijjip
| mijjpni'g
| mijjultpni'g
|}

Now let us look at the negated forms.

{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| mu mijjiewap
| mu mijjiewg'p
| mu mijjiewg'p
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| mu mijjiewg'p
| mu mijjiewg'p
|-
| 2 Second person
| mu mijjiewt'p
| mu mijjiewwaq'p
| mu mijjiewwaq'p
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| mu mijjug'p
| ?
| ?
|}

Thus this would be the conjugation of the negated form:

{| class="wikitable"
! Negated Past||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| -ewap
| -ewg'p
| -ewg'p
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| -ewg'p
| -ewg'p
|-
| 2 Second person
| -ewt'p
| -ewwaq'p
| -ewwaq'p
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| -ug'p
| ?
| ?
|}

For the third person the -''ug'p'' can change to -''ewgp'' for example:

<gl>
\gll Mu alasi-ew-g'p
not go-NEG-SG.PAST
\trans She didn't go
</gl>

== Future Tense ==
First let us compare the affirmative tense for eat:

{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| mijjias
| ?
| mijjit'snen
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
|
| mijjit'snu
|-
| 2 Second person
| mijjit's(g)
| ?
| mijjitoqs'p
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| mijjitew
| ''n/a''
| mijjultitaq
|}
I was not able to elicit dual forms.

We compare the future affirmative with the negated below:

{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| ma mijjiew
| ma mijjiug
| ma mijjiug
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| ma mijjiug
| ma mijjiug
|-
| 2 Second person
| ma mijjiwn
| ?
| ?
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| ma mijjiewg
| ''n/a''
| ma mijjultiewoq
|}
NOTE: In the future the ''mu'' changes to ''ma'' !! Like ''mu'', ''ma'' must always come before the verb conjugated in the negative future.
The correspondent was not able to produce a dual form in the future.

Now here is a paradigm of the negated endings in the future.

{| class="wikitable"
! Negated Future||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| -ew
| -ug
| -ug
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| -ug
| -ug
|-
| 2 Second person
| -iwn
| ?
| ?
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| -ewg
| ''n/a''
| -ultiwoq
|}

As you may have noticed the future tense is easy! The verbs take the same endings as the negated present tense but the ''mu'' is replaced with ''ma'' thus indicating future.

== When negation is used ==

When the verb is negated there must always find a negative particle (like ''mu'' or ''ma''). If not the sentence is ungrammatical as shown below:

<gl>
\gll *gis-wissugwatige-w
can-cook.1-NEG
\trans I cannot cook (intended meaning)
</gl>

The only form of the above sentence must be:

<gl>
\gll ma gis-wissugwatige-w
NEG can-cook.1-NEG
\trans I cannot cook
</gl>

Thus it is seen that ''ma'' comes before the verb, now making the sentence grammatical.

''ma'' always precedes the future tense AND when the ''gis'' prefix is attached to the verb conjugated in the present for example:

<gl>
\gll ma gis-amalga-w-g
NEG can-dance-NEG-3
\trans s/he cannot dance
</gl>

There are some expressions that always take the negative form of the verb such as ''me menga'' (not yet) and ''mowen'' (nobody) that take the negative form of the verb: (examples from [http://www.mikmaqonline.org/ Mi'gmaq Online Dictionary])

<gl>
\gll me menag newt ajetten-u-g
NEG yet one time-NEG-3
\trans it is not one o’clock yet
</gl>

<gl>
\gll mo-wen mijie-w-g
NEG-who eat-NEG-3
\trans no one is eating
</gl>

<gl>
\gll moqwa' goqwei eign-u-g
no thing be-NEG-3
\trans there is nothing there
</gl>

Below is a list of common particles after which the negated form is used. This list is not complete but these are the most common forms.

{| class="wikitable"
! Particle || When used || Translation
|-
| ''mu''
| before negated present and past
| not
|-
| ''mutt''
| before negated imperative
| do not
|-
| ''lpa mu''
| before negated present and past
| not even
|-
| ''mowen''
| before negated present, past and future
| no one/nobody
|-
| ''moqwa' goqwei'''
| before negated present, past and future
| nothing
|-
| ''me menag''
| before negated verb
| not yet
|-
| ''ma''
| before negated future verb and preverb ''gis'' (can)
| not
|-
|}

''moqwa' goqwei'' is also spelled ''mu goqwei'' and a variant of this is ''mu'' + negated verb + ''goqwei'' when used in object position. It is inanimate. As in the following example:

<gl>
\gll mu malqutem-u goqwei
NEG eat.1>0-NEG what
\trans I eat nothing
</gl>

== Negative Concord ==
As can be seen above, Mi'gmaq is a negative concord language. Negative concord is where "double or multiple negative[s] [do] not express an affirmative but a negative" (van der Wouden & Zwarts, 1992). This is similar to French ''Je n'ai vue personne'' 'I have seen nobody' where both the ''ne'' and ''personne'' are both negative but the resulting sentence is negative, rather than each cancelling the other out resulting in a affirmative sentence, i.e. 'I have seen someone'. Mi'gmaq has negation marked in two places with both negative particles, i.e. ''mu'' & ''ma'', and a negative conjugation of the verb, i.e. with ''-u'' or ''-w'' added. Compare examples <glr id="1"/> and <glr id="2"/>.

<gl id="1">
\gll lpa'tuj eigu-p
boy be.there.PST-SG
\trans the boy was there
</gl>

<gl id="2">
\gll lpa'tuj mu eimu-g-u-p
boy NEG be.there-PST-NEG-SG
\trans the boy was not there
</gl>

= Word Order =
The negative particle (or possibly affix) ''mu'' always appears before the verb it negates. Although words can intervene between ''mu'' and the verb it negates, ''mu'' must always precede the verb.

<gl>
\gll Mali mu amal-gag-u-p
Mali NEG dance-PAST-NEG-SG
\trans Mali did not dance
</gl>

<gl>
\gll mu Mali amal-gag-u-p
NEG Mali dance-PAST-NEG-SG
\trans Mali did not dance
</gl>

Placement of ''mu'' post-verbally results in ungrammaticality, as illustrated below.

<gl>
\gll lpa'tuj mu eimug-u-p
boy NEG be.there.PST-NEG-SG
\trans the boy was not there
</gl>

Acceptable word orders:
*mu eimugup lpa'tuj
*mu lpa'tuj eimugup

Unacceptable word orders:
* *eimugup lpa'tuj mu
* *eimugup mu lpa'tuj
* *lpa'tuj eimugup mu

Furthermore, with regards to word order, it appears that negation must come right before the constituent it negates. Here is an example sentence without negation:

<gl>
\gll ula na lpa'tuj ta'n egitgup wigatign
this DEM boy that read.PST book
\trans this is the boy that read the book
</gl>

If we want to negate the first clause, as to say "This is '''not''' the boy that read the book", negation must directly precede 'boy'.

<gl>
\gll ula na mu lpa'tuj ta'n egitgup wigatign
this DEM NEG boy that read.PST book
\trans this is not the boy that read the book
</gl>

The following word orders for negation in the first clause are impossible:
* *ula na lpa'tuj mu...
* *ula mu na lpa'tuj...
* *mu ula na lpa'tuj...

If we want to negate the second clause, as to say "This is the boy that did '''not''' read the book", the word order may be varied, as long as negation comes before the verb (as discussed previously).

== Scope of Negation ==
As stated above, ''mu'' always comes before the verb. There may be particles that intrude between ''mu'' and the negated verb, but as long as ''mu'' comes before the negated verb, the structure is grammatical. [http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED136614.pdf Micmac Grammar, 1976] Sometimes the meaning of the sentence can change depending on the position of ''mu''.

<gl>
\gll egjitm Mali mu amal-gag-u-p
possible Mali NEG dance-PST-NEG-SG
\trans it is true that Mali did not dance
</gl>

<gl>
\gll mu egjitm Mali amal-gag-u-p
NEG possible Mali dance-PST.NEG.SG
\trans it is not true that Mali danced
</gl>

We would also expect phrases with adverb-like particles translatable as "it is possible" or "it is true" or "it is obvious" would also vary regarding negation.

=Language change and negation=
Often I was not able to elicit both the dual and plural forms of a verb. There are many times when I could only elicit the dual form, or times when the dual and plural forms were the same. It has been noted by our consultants that younger speakers are not using the plural forms but are using the dual form to mean both dual and plural. This seems be a language change happening currently in the speech community where the younger generation is leading the change. As noted in the paradigm above for 'eat' in the negated present tense, both dual and plural forms are the same. Here it seems that the plural form is used for both dual and plural meanings. This would strongly suggest a change happening in the speech community.

=References=
Clark, Jeremiah S. "A Dictionary of the Micmac Language." Rand's Micmac Dictionary. Charlottetown, PEI: The Patriot Publishing Company, 1902. Print.

Delisle, Gill L., and Manny L. Metallic. Micmac Teaching Grammar. Ecowi, QC: Thunderbird Press, 1976. Print.

L'Abbe Maillard, M. Grammaire De La Langue Mikmaque. New York: Presse Cramoisy de Jean-Marie Shea, 1864. Print.

Metallic, Janine. "Mi'gmaq Elicitation Session for Field Methods of Linguistics." Ed. Class, Carol Little and LING415. Montreal, QC: n/a, 2011. Print.

Payne, Thomas Edward. Describing Morphosyntax: a Guide for Field Linguists. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge UP, 2008. Print.

Paul-Martin, Patsy. "Mi'kmaq Verb Conjugation." Ed. Orthography, Mi'kmaq Talking Posters Smith/Francis. Truto, NS: Eastern Woodland Print Communications, 2011. Print.

Proulx, Paul. "Proto-Algonquian Verb Inflection." Studies in Native American Languages 15.2 (1990): 100-45. Print.

van der Wouden, Ton, and Frans Zwarts. "Negative Concord." D. Gilbers and S. Looyenga (eds), Language and Cognition 2. Yearbook 1992 Linguistic Theory and Knowledge Representation of the University of Groningen (1992): 317-31. Print.

Negation

2014-08-07T18:09:26Z

Carol: /* Present Tense */

=Introduction=
Negation is the process of turning affirmative statements into the opposite form. For example, the negative equivalent of affirmative sentence, ''I am eating'' is ''I am not eating''. In English there are a few processes at work. ''not'' must always come with an auxiliary verb like the verb 'to have' and 'to be'. In Mi'gmaq, with its extremely detailed and expansive verb conjugations in the present, it is not surprising that the negated conjugation of verbs is just as detailed and expansive as they are in the affirmative.

To start off any commentary on negation, it seems fitting to start of with the word "no" which is ''moqwa'' in Mi'gmaq. (The opposite of this is ''e'e'' , meaning "yes".) Negation in Mi'gmaq is similar to that of Obijwe in that there is both an affix that occurs between the verb and the person marker and a word that comes before the verb denoting negation. See [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ojibwe_grammar#Verbs Verb Conjugation in Ojibwe]. The Mi'gmaq negated affix is ''w'' or ''u'' which is very closely related to the Proto-Algonquian form for negation which is is ''*-w'' ( [http://kuscholarworks.ku.edu/dspace/bitstream/1808/440/1/ling.wp.v15.n2.paper6.pdf Proulx, 1990] ). ''w'' or ''u'' are very closely related phonetically since ''w'' is the semivowel corresponding to the vowel ''u''. Bear in mind that during the elicitation sessions, sometimes it was unsure whether to use ''w'' or ''u''.

Negation in Mi'gmaq consists of adding ''mu'' or ''ma'' then the verb conjugated in the negated verb form. After ''mu'' or ''ma'' the verb must always contain a negative particle. We must think of these two things as inseparable. ''mu'' always comes before the negative conjugated verb in the present or past, and ''ma'' always comes before future or if the prefix ''gis'' ('can', 'to be able to') is attached to the verb. All other prefixes abide by the rules ''mu'' before present or past and ''ma'' before future. There are other particles that take the negated form of the verb, but it is obvious that these particles express a negated idea.

Please note as well that in some of the studies on Mi'gmaq and Algonquian languages the term 'nonaffirmative' is used to describe the negated form. For consistency in this report, I will use the term 'negated' to indicate the form of the verb which is the opposite of affirmative. 'Nonaffirmative' and 'negated' however refer to the same process of negation.

= Conjugation of the Negated Verb =
I have selected the verb ''mijji'' (to eat). Please note that some resources spell this like ''mijji'' where other spell it ''miji'' ([http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED136614.pdf Micmac Teaching Grammar, 1976]). I have selected the spelling from [http://www.mikmaqonline.org/servlet/dictionaryFrameSet.html?arg0=mijjit&method=searchFromMikmaq the Migmaq talking dictionary]. It is also important to note that the Micmac Teaching Grammar uses an orthography that is different of all other orthographies used with Mi'gmaq. I will indicate which terms they are and give the Listuguj equivalent orthographical manner of writing them.

The simplified formula for the conjugation in the negated form: the base form + ''u'' or ''w'' + person ending ([http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED136614.pdf Micmac Teaching Grammar, 1976])
The base form for intransitive verbs is always the verb in the first person singular. For example I eat is ''mijji''. Now to create the second person singular we add the ending -''n'' denoting second person singular and get the form ''mijjin''. For another type of verb (henceforth referred to as the ''a'' verbs) we take the base form ''amalga-'' and add -''n'' to get ''amalgan'' (you dance) and to get the first person singular we add -''i''. Please note that it has been hypothesized that there are at least eleven different conjugations. We will only be dealing with a couple here. Because of reasons of time limitation, I was not able to elicit all eleven types but when there is a difference in conjugation, that will be noted. Note that in the plural the ''u'' or ''w'' comes after ''-ulti-''. This could be due the the fact that ''-ulti-'' is the plural affix that attaches to the base form of the verb and does not convey anything about the tense of the verb, rather it is used to denote that the verb is plural. Thus the ''u'' or ''w'' comes right before the tense marker which is always at the end of the verb. For the first person singular in present there is a null tense marker at the end of some verbs (for example the ''-i'' verbs) thus the negative marker is at the end.

== Present Tense ==
First is a comparison of the affirmative and negated paradigms of the verb ''mijji'' ('eat').

{| class="wikitable"
|+ mijji- 'eat'
|-
! scope="col" colspan="2"| ↓person / number→
! scope="col" | SG
! scope="col" | DU
! scope="col" | PL
|-
! scope="row" rowspan="2"| 1
! scope="row"| 13
| rowspan="2" | mijji
|mijjieg
|mijjultieg
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| mijji'gw
| mijjulti'gw
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2" | 2
| mijjin
| mijjioq
| mijjultioq
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2"| 3
| mijjit
| mijjijig
| mijjultijig
|-
|}

{| class="wikitable"
|+ mu mijji- 'not eat'
|-
! scope="col" colspan="2"| ↓person / number→
! scope="col" | SG
! scope="col" | DU
! scope="col" | PL
|-
! scope="row" rowspan="2"| 1
! scope="row"| 13
| rowspan="2" | mu mijjiw
| mu mijjiweg
| mu mijjultiweg
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| mu mijjigw
| mu mijjultigw
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2" | 2
| mu mijjiun
| mu mijjiwoq
| mu mijjultiwoq
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2"| 3
| mu mijjiug
| mu mijjiewg
| mu mijjiultiewg
|-
|}

The word ''mu'' signifies negation. When ''mu'' is in front of the verb, the verb must also be conjugated in the negative form. In the above table we see the intrusion of the sound ''u'', ''ew'' or ''w''. The following table illustrates the endings for the present negative tense, keeping in mind ''mu'' must ALWAYS come right before the negated verb. When ''mu'' precedes a verb it must ALWAYS be in the negated form.

Below is a table that summarizes the VAI -i stem negative person endings in present conjugation. Inanimate [IN] conjugation was taken from the Micmac Grammar (1976, pg 155).

{| class="wikitable"
|+ VAI -i stem negative present person endings
|-
! scope="col" colspan="2"| ↓person / number→
! scope="col" | SG
! scope="col" | DU
! scope="col" | PL
|-
! scope="row" rowspan="2"| 1
! scope="row"| 13
| rowspan="2" |-u
| -ultieweg
| -ultieweg
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| -ultieweg
| -ultieweg
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2" | 2
| -un
| -woq
| -uwoq
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2"| 3.AN
| -ug
| -ewg
| -ultiewg
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2"| 3.IN
| -nug
| -nugel
| -nultinugel
|-
|}

The forms for the first person dual and plural in the exclusive and inclusive forms are the same. As shown by other data, the dual form seems to be in the process of disappearing. This is one such example where the dual form does not exist for the plural first person. Some younger speakers do not use the dual form at all so it is not surprising that we find a gap in the dual form here. All this is according to the speaker but if we followed the pattern of the previous forms we would expect the dual form for the inclusive and exclusive first person to be ''-ieweg''. "When the verb is negated, then the -g third person is ALWAYS found" (Micmac Grammar, 1976 pg 93).

Below is a comparison of different verbs to give an idea of how to conjugate different types of verbs in the negated form. All forms are conjugated in the present singular third person animate. The form of -''elie-'' was taken from Micmac Grammar (pg 155). For more detail about these forms see [[VAI]].

{| class="wikitable"
! VAI stem || Base Form || Gloss || Affirmative || Gloss || Negated || Gloss
|-
| -i
| mijji-
| eat
| mijjit
| s/he eats
| mu mijjiug
| s/he does not eat
|-
| -a
| amalga-
| dance
| amalgat
| s/he dances
| mu amalgawg
| s/he does not dance
|-
| -asi
| alasi-
| go around
| alasit
| s/he goes around
| mu alasiewgw
| s/he does not go around
|-
| -e
| elie-
| go
| eliet
| s/he goes
| mu eliegw
| s/he does not go
|-
|}

For verb conjugations in the affirmative please see [http://firstnationhelp.com/ali/posters/pdf/verb_conjugation.pdf Mi'kmaq Verb Conjugation]. As you can see, this site uses the verb ''mijisi'' meaning 'to eat'. In Listuguj this is not used as the word for to eat because it sounds too close for the verb ''mejisi'' 'to excrete'.

=== Transitive ===
Below is the conjugation in present of a transitive verb that takes an inanimate object.

{| class="wikitable" style="text-align:center"
|+ VTI Conjugation Class 1: -m class
|-
! scope="col" | ↓subject / object→
! scope="col" | 0SG
! scope="col" | 0PL
|-
! scope="row" | 1
| malqutm
| malqutmann
|-
! scope="row" | 13
| malqutmeg
| malqutmegl
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| malqutmu'gw
| malqutmu'gwl
|-
! scope="row" | 2
| malqutmn
| malqutmnn
|-
! scope="row" | 2PL
| malqutmoq
| malqutmoql
|-
! scope="row" | 3
| malqutem'g
| malqutem'gl
|-
! scope="row" | 3PL
| malqutmi'tij
| malqutemi'titl
|}

{| class="wikitable" style="text-align:center"
|+ VTI Negative Conjugation Class 1: -m class
|-
! scope="col" | ↓subject / object→
! scope="col" | 0SG
! scope="col" | 0PL
|-
! scope="row" | 1
| malqutmu
| malqutmuann
|-
! scope="row" | 13
| malqutmueg
| malqutmuegl
|-
! scope="row" | 12
|
|
|-
! scope="row" | 2
| malqutmu'n
| malqutmu'nn
|-
! scope="row" | 2PL
| malqutmuoq
| malqutmuoqol
|-
! scope="row" | 3
| malqutmug
| malqutmugl
|-
! scope="row" | 3PL
| malqutmu'tiwgw
| malqutmu'tiwgwl
|-
|}

{| class="wikitable" style="text-align:center"
|+ VTI Negative Conjugation Class 1: -m class
|-
! scope="col" | ↓subject / object→
! scope="col" | 0SG
! scope="col" | 0PL
|-
! scope="row" | 1
| -mu
| -muann
|-
! scope="row" | 13
| -mueg
| -muegl
|-
! scope="row" | 12
|
|
|-
! scope="row" | 2
| -mu'n
| -mu'nn
|-
! scope="row" | 2PL
| -muoq
| -muoqol
|-
! scope="row" | 3
| -mug
| -mugl
|-
! scope="row" | 3PL
| -mu'tiwgw
| -mu'tiwgwl
|-
|}

== Imperative ==
Here is the formation of the affirmative imperative:
{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijji-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 2 Second person
| mijji
| ?
| mijjultiug
|-
|}

Now we compare it to the negated:
{| class="wikitable"
! ''mutt mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 2 Second person
| mutt mijjiew
| ?
| mutt mijjultineu
|-
|}

== Past Tense ==
Again for the past we compare the past and the negated past.

{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| mijjiap
| mijjieg'p
| mijjultieg'p
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| mijjiewg'p
| mijjultiewg'p
|-
| 2 Second person
| mijjit'p
| mijjiqop
| mijjultioqop
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| mijjip
| mijjpni'g
| mijjultpni'g
|}

Now let us look at the negated forms.

{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| mu mijjiewap
| mu mijjiewg'p
| mu mijjiewg'p
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| mu mijjiewg'p
| mu mijjiewg'p
|-
| 2 Second person
| mu mijjiewt'p
| mu mijjiewwaq'p
| mu mijjiewwaq'p
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| mu mijjug'p
| ?
| ?
|}

Thus this would be the conjugation of the negated form:

{| class="wikitable"
! Negated Past||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| -ewap
| -ewg'p
| -ewg'p
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| -ewg'p
| -ewg'p
|-
| 2 Second person
| -ewt'p
| -ewwaq'p
| -ewwaq'p
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| -ug'p
| ?
| ?
|}

For the third person the -''ug'p'' can change to -''ewgp'' for example:

<gl>
\gll Mu alasi-ew-g'p
not go-NEG-SG.PAST
\trans She didn't go
</gl>

== Future Tense ==
First let us compare the affirmative tense for eat:

{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| mijjias
| ?
| mijjit'snen
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
|
| mijjit'snu
|-
| 2 Second person
| mijjit's(g)
| ?
| mijjitoqs'p
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| mijjitew
| ''n/a''
| mijjultitaq
|}
I was not able to elicit dual forms.

We compare the future affirmative with the negated below:

{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| ma mijjiew
| ma mijjiug
| ma mijjiug
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| ma mijjiug
| ma mijjiug
|-
| 2 Second person
| ma mijjiwn
| ?
| ?
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| ma mijjiewg
| ''n/a''
| ma mijjultiewoq
|}
NOTE: In the future the ''mu'' changes to ''ma'' !! Like ''mu'', ''ma'' must always come before the verb conjugated in the negative future.
The correspondent was not able to produce a dual form in the future.

Now here is a paradigm of the negated endings in the future.

{| class="wikitable"
! Negated Future||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| -ew
| -ug
| -ug
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| -ug
| -ug
|-
| 2 Second person
| -iwn
| ?
| ?
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| -ewg
| ''n/a''
| -ultiwoq
|}

As you may have noticed the future tense is easy! The verbs take the same endings as the negated present tense but the ''mu'' is replaced with ''ma'' thus indicating future.

== When negation is used ==

When the verb is negated there must always find a negative particle (like ''mu'' or ''ma''). If not the sentence is ungrammatical as shown below:

<gl>
\gll *gis-wissugwatige-w
can-cook.1-NEG
\trans I cannot cook (intended meaning)
</gl>

The only form of the above sentence must be:

<gl>
\gll ma gis-wissugwatige-w
NEG can-cook.1-NEG
\trans I cannot cook
</gl>

Thus it is seen that ''ma'' comes before the verb, now making the sentence grammatical.

''ma'' always precedes the future tense AND when the ''gis'' prefix is attached to the verb conjugated in the present for example:

<gl>
\gll ma gis-amalga-w-g
NEG can-dance-NEG-3
\trans s/he cannot dance
</gl>

There are some expressions that always take the negative form of the verb such as ''me menga'' (not yet) and ''mowen'' (nobody) that take the negative form of the verb: (examples from [http://www.mikmaqonline.org/ Mi'gmaq Online Dictionary])

<gl>
\gll me menag newt ajetten-u-g
NEG yet one time-NEG-3
\trans it is not one o’clock yet
</gl>

<gl>
\gll mo-wen mijie-w-g
NEG-who eat-NEG-3
\trans no one is eating
</gl>

<gl>
\gll moqwa' goqwei eign-u-g
no thing be-NEG-3
\trans there is nothing there
</gl>

Below is a list of common particles after which the negated form is used. This list is not complete but these are the most common forms.

{| class="wikitable"
! Particle || When used || Translation
|-
| ''mu''
| before negated present and past
| not
|-
| ''mutt''
| before negated imperative
| do not
|-
| ''lpa mu''
| before negated present and past
| not even
|-
| ''mowen''
| before negated present, past and future
| no one/nobody
|-
| ''moqwa' goqwei'''
| before negated present, past and future
| nothing
|-
| ''me menag''
| before negated verb
| not yet
|-
| ''ma''
| before negated future verb and preverb ''gis'' (can)
| not
|-
|}

''moqwa' goqwei'' is also spelled ''mu goqwei'' and a variant of this is ''mu'' + negated verb + ''goqwei'' when used in object position. It is inanimate. As in the following example:

<gl>
\gll mu malqutem-u goqwei
NEG eat.1>0-NEG what
\trans I eat nothing
</gl>

== Negative Concord ==
As can be seen above, Mi'gmaq is a negative concord language. Negative concord is where "double or multiple negative[s] [do] not express an affirmative but a negative" (van der Wouden & Zwarts, 1992). This is similar to French ''Je n'ai vue personne'' 'I have seen nobody' where both the ''ne'' and ''personne'' are both negative but the resulting sentence is negative, rather than each cancelling the other out resulting in a affirmative sentence, i.e. 'I have seen someone'. Mi'gmaq has negation marked in two places with both negative particles, i.e. ''mu'' & ''ma'', and a negative conjugation of the verb, i.e. with ''-u'' or ''-w'' added. Compare examples <glr id="1"/> and <glr id="2"/>.

<gl id="1">
\gll lpa'tuj eigu-p
boy be.there.PST-SG
\trans the boy was there
</gl>

<gl id="2">
\gll lpa'tuj mu eimu-g-u-p
boy NEG be.there-PST-NEG-SG
\trans the boy was not there
</gl>

= Word Order =
The negative particle (or possibly affix) ''mu'' always appears before the verb it negates. Although words can intervene between ''mu'' and the verb it negates, ''mu'' must always precede the verb.

<gl>
\gll Mali mu amal-gag-u-p
Mali NEG dance-PAST-NEG-SG
\trans Mali did not dance
</gl>

<gl>
\gll mu Mali amal-gag-u-p
NEG Mali dance-PAST-NEG-SG
\trans Mali did not dance
</gl>

Placement of ''mu'' post-verbally results in ungrammaticality, as illustrated below.

<gl>
\gll lpa'tuj mu eimug-u-p
boy NEG be.there.PST-NEG-SG
\trans the boy was not there
</gl>

Acceptable word orders:
*mu eimugup lpa'tuj
*mu lpa'tuj eimugup

Unacceptable word orders:
* *eimugup lpa'tuj mu
* *eimugup mu lpa'tuj
* *lpa'tuj eimugup mu

Furthermore, with regards to word order, it appears that negation must come right before the constituent it negates. Here is an example sentence without negation:

<gl>
\gll ula na lpa'tuj ta'n egitgup wigatign
this DEM boy that read.PST book
\trans this is the boy that read the book
</gl>

If we want to negate the first clause, as to say "This is '''not''' the boy that read the book", negation must directly precede 'boy'.

<gl>
\gll ula na mu lpa'tuj ta'n egitgup wigatign
this DEM NEG boy that read.PST book
\trans this is not the boy that read the book
</gl>

The following word orders for negation in the first clause are impossible:
* *ula na lpa'tuj mu...
* *ula mu na lpa'tuj...
* *mu ula na lpa'tuj...

If we want to negate the second clause, as to say "This is the boy that did '''not''' read the book", the word order may be varied, as long as negation comes before the verb (as discussed previously).

== Scope of Negation ==
As stated above, ''mu'' always comes before the verb. There may be particles that intrude between ''mu'' and the negated verb, but as long as ''mu'' comes before the negated verb, the structure is grammatical. [http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED136614.pdf Micmac Grammar, 1976] Sometimes the meaning of the sentence can change depending on the position of ''mu''.

<gl>
\gll egjitm Mali mu amal-gag-u-p
possible Mali NEG dance-PST-NEG-SG
\trans it is true that Mali did not dance
</gl>

<gl>
\gll mu egjitm Mali amal-gag-u-p
NEG possible Mali dance-PST.NEG.SG
\trans it is not true that Mali danced
</gl>

We would also expect phrases with adverb-like particles translatable as "it is possible" or "it is true" or "it is obvious" would also vary regarding negation.

=Language change and negation=
Often I was not able to elicit both the dual and plural forms of a verb. There are many times when I could only elicit the dual form, or times when the dual and plural forms were the same. It has been noted by our consultants that younger speakers are not using the plural forms but are using the dual form to mean both dual and plural. This seems be a language change happening currently in the speech community where the younger generation is leading the change. As noted in the paradigm above for 'eat' in the negated present tense, both dual and plural forms are the same. Here it seems that the plural form is used for both dual and plural meanings. This would strongly suggest a change happening in the speech community.

=References=
Clark, Jeremiah S. "A Dictionary of the Micmac Language." Rand's Micmac Dictionary. Charlottetown, PEI: The Patriot Publishing Company, 1902. Print.

Delisle, Gill L., and Manny L. Metallic. Micmac Teaching Grammar. Ecowi, QC: Thunderbird Press, 1976. Print.

L'Abbe Maillard, M. Grammaire De La Langue Mikmaque. New York: Presse Cramoisy de Jean-Marie Shea, 1864. Print.

Metallic, Janine. "Mi'gmaq Elicitation Session for Field Methods of Linguistics." Ed. Class, Carol Little and LING415. Montreal, QC: n/a, 2011. Print.

Payne, Thomas Edward. Describing Morphosyntax: a Guide for Field Linguists. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge UP, 2008. Print.

Paul-Martin, Patsy. "Mi'kmaq Verb Conjugation." Ed. Orthography, Mi'kmaq Talking Posters Smith/Francis. Truto, NS: Eastern Woodland Print Communications, 2011. Print.

Proulx, Paul. "Proto-Algonquian Verb Inflection." Studies in Native American Languages 15.2 (1990): 100-45. Print.

van der Wouden, Ton, and Frans Zwarts. "Negative Concord." D. Gilbers and S. Looyenga (eds), Language and Cognition 2. Yearbook 1992 Linguistic Theory and Knowledge Representation of the University of Groningen (1992): 317-31. Print.

Negation

2014-08-07T18:07:12Z

Carol: /* Present Tense */

=Introduction=
Negation is the process of turning affirmative statements into the opposite form. For example, the negative equivalent of affirmative sentence, ''I am eating'' is ''I am not eating''. In English there are a few processes at work. ''not'' must always come with an auxiliary verb like the verb 'to have' and 'to be'. In Mi'gmaq, with its extremely detailed and expansive verb conjugations in the present, it is not surprising that the negated conjugation of verbs is just as detailed and expansive as they are in the affirmative.

To start off any commentary on negation, it seems fitting to start of with the word "no" which is ''moqwa'' in Mi'gmaq. (The opposite of this is ''e'e'' , meaning "yes".) Negation in Mi'gmaq is similar to that of Obijwe in that there is both an affix that occurs between the verb and the person marker and a word that comes before the verb denoting negation. See [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ojibwe_grammar#Verbs Verb Conjugation in Ojibwe]. The Mi'gmaq negated affix is ''w'' or ''u'' which is very closely related to the Proto-Algonquian form for negation which is is ''*-w'' ( [http://kuscholarworks.ku.edu/dspace/bitstream/1808/440/1/ling.wp.v15.n2.paper6.pdf Proulx, 1990] ). ''w'' or ''u'' are very closely related phonetically since ''w'' is the semivowel corresponding to the vowel ''u''. Bear in mind that during the elicitation sessions, sometimes it was unsure whether to use ''w'' or ''u''.

Negation in Mi'gmaq consists of adding ''mu'' or ''ma'' then the verb conjugated in the negated verb form. After ''mu'' or ''ma'' the verb must always contain a negative particle. We must think of these two things as inseparable. ''mu'' always comes before the negative conjugated verb in the present or past, and ''ma'' always comes before future or if the prefix ''gis'' ('can', 'to be able to') is attached to the verb. All other prefixes abide by the rules ''mu'' before present or past and ''ma'' before future. There are other particles that take the negated form of the verb, but it is obvious that these particles express a negated idea.

Please note as well that in some of the studies on Mi'gmaq and Algonquian languages the term 'nonaffirmative' is used to describe the negated form. For consistency in this report, I will use the term 'negated' to indicate the form of the verb which is the opposite of affirmative. 'Nonaffirmative' and 'negated' however refer to the same process of negation.

= Conjugation of the Negated Verb =
I have selected the verb ''mijji'' (to eat). Please note that some resources spell this like ''mijji'' where other spell it ''miji'' ([http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED136614.pdf Micmac Teaching Grammar, 1976]). I have selected the spelling from [http://www.mikmaqonline.org/servlet/dictionaryFrameSet.html?arg0=mijjit&method=searchFromMikmaq the Migmaq talking dictionary]. It is also important to note that the Micmac Teaching Grammar uses an orthography that is different of all other orthographies used with Mi'gmaq. I will indicate which terms they are and give the Listuguj equivalent orthographical manner of writing them.

The simplified formula for the conjugation in the negated form: the base form + ''u'' or ''w'' + person ending ([http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED136614.pdf Micmac Teaching Grammar, 1976])
The base form for intransitive verbs is always the verb in the first person singular. For example I eat is ''mijji''. Now to create the second person singular we add the ending -''n'' denoting second person singular and get the form ''mijjin''. For another type of verb (henceforth referred to as the ''a'' verbs) we take the base form ''amalga-'' and add -''n'' to get ''amalgan'' (you dance) and to get the first person singular we add -''i''. Please note that it has been hypothesized that there are at least eleven different conjugations. We will only be dealing with a couple here. Because of reasons of time limitation, I was not able to elicit all eleven types but when there is a difference in conjugation, that will be noted. Note that in the plural the ''u'' or ''w'' comes after ''-ulti-''. This could be due the the fact that ''-ulti-'' is the plural affix that attaches to the base form of the verb and does not convey anything about the tense of the verb, rather it is used to denote that the verb is plural. Thus the ''u'' or ''w'' comes right before the tense marker which is always at the end of the verb. For the first person singular in present there is a null tense marker at the end of some verbs (for example the ''-i'' verbs) thus the negative marker is at the end.

== Present Tense ==
First is a comparison of the affirmative and negated paradigms of the verb ''mijji'' ('eat').

{| class="wikitable"
|+ mijji- 'eat'
|-
! scope="col" colspan="2"| ↓person / number→
! scope="col" | SG
! scope="col" | DU
! scope="col" | PL
|-
! scope="row" rowspan="2"| 1
! scope="row"| 13
| rowspan="2" | mijji
|mijjieg
|mijjultieg
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| mijji'gw
| mijjulti'gw
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2" | 2
| mijjin
| mijjioq
| mijjultioq
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2"| 3
| mijjit
| mijjijig
| mijjultijig
|-
|}

{| class="wikitable"
|+ mu mijji- 'not eat'
|-
! scope="col" colspan="2"| ↓person / number→
! scope="col" | SG
! scope="col" | DU
! scope="col" | PL
|-
! scope="row" rowspan="2"| 1
! scope="row"| 13
| rowspan="2" | mu mijjiw
| mu mijjiweg
| mu mijjultiweg
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| mu mijjiweg
| mu mijjultiweg
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2" | 2
| mu mijjiun
| mu mijjiwoq
| mu mijjuwoq
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2"| 3
| mu mijjiug
| mu mijjiewg
| mu mijjiultiewg
|-
|}

The word ''mu'' signifies negation. When ''mu'' is in front of the verb, the verb must also be conjugated in the negative form. In the above table we see the intrusion of the sound ''u'', ''ew'' or ''w''. The following table illustrates the endings for the present negative tense, keeping in mind ''mu'' must ALWAYS come right before the negated verb. When ''mu'' precedes a verb it must ALWAYS be in the negated form.

Below is a table that summarizes the VAI -i stem negative person endings in present conjugation. Inanimate [IN] conjugation was taken from the Micmac Grammar (1976, pg 155).

{| class="wikitable"
|+ VAI -i stem negative present person endings
|-
! scope="col" colspan="2"| ↓person / number→
! scope="col" | SG
! scope="col" | DU
! scope="col" | PL
|-
! scope="row" rowspan="2"| 1
! scope="row"| 13
| rowspan="2" |-u
| -ultieweg
| -ultieweg
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| -ultieweg
| -ultieweg
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2" | 2
| -un
| -woq
| -uwoq
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2"| 3.AN
| -ug
| -ewg
| -ultiewg
|-
! scope="row" colspan="2"| 3.IN
| -nug
| -nugel
| -nultinugel
|-
|}

The forms for the first person dual and plural in the exclusive and inclusive forms are the same. As shown by other data, the dual form seems to be in the process of disappearing. This is one such example where the dual form does not exist for the plural first person. Some younger speakers do not use the dual form at all so it is not surprising that we find a gap in the dual form here. All this is according to the speaker but if we followed the pattern of the previous forms we would expect the dual form for the inclusive and exclusive first person to be ''-ieweg''. "When the verb is negated, then the -g third person is ALWAYS found" (Micmac Grammar, 1976 pg 93).

Below is a comparison of different verbs to give an idea of how to conjugate different types of verbs in the negated form. All forms are conjugated in the present singular third person animate. The form of -''elie-'' was taken from Micmac Grammar (pg 155). For more detail about these forms see [[VAI]].

{| class="wikitable"
! VAI stem || Base Form || Gloss || Affirmative || Gloss || Negated || Gloss
|-
| -i
| mijji-
| eat
| mijjit
| s/he eats
| mu mijjiug
| s/he does not eat
|-
| -a
| amalga-
| dance
| amalgat
| s/he dances
| mu amalgawg
| s/he does not dance
|-
| -asi
| alasi-
| go around
| alasit
| s/he goes around
| mu alasiewgw
| s/he does not go around
|-
| -e
| elie-
| go
| eliet
| s/he goes
| mu eliegw
| s/he does not go
|-
|}

For verb conjugations in the affirmative please see [http://firstnationhelp.com/ali/posters/pdf/verb_conjugation.pdf Mi'kmaq Verb Conjugation]. As you can see, this site uses the verb ''mijisi'' meaning 'to eat'. In Listuguj this is not used as the word for to eat because it sounds too close for the verb ''mejisi'' 'to excrete'.

=== Transitive ===
Below is the conjugation in present of a transitive verb that takes an inanimate object.

{| class="wikitable" style="text-align:center"
|+ VTI Conjugation Class 1: -m class
|-
! scope="col" | ↓subject / object→
! scope="col" | 0SG
! scope="col" | 0PL
|-
! scope="row" | 1
| malqutm
| malqutmann
|-
! scope="row" | 13
| malqutmeg
| malqutmegl
|-
! scope="row" | 12
| malqutmu'gw
| malqutmu'gwl
|-
! scope="row" | 2
| malqutmn
| malqutmnn
|-
! scope="row" | 2PL
| malqutmoq
| malqutmoql
|-
! scope="row" | 3
| malqutem'g
| malqutem'gl
|-
! scope="row" | 3PL
| malqutmi'tij
| malqutemi'titl
|}

{| class="wikitable" style="text-align:center"
|+ VTI Negative Conjugation Class 1: -m class
|-
! scope="col" | ↓subject / object→
! scope="col" | 0SG
! scope="col" | 0PL
|-
! scope="row" | 1
| malqutmu
| malqutmuann
|-
! scope="row" | 13
| malqutmueg
| malqutmuegl
|-
! scope="row" | 12
|
|
|-
! scope="row" | 2
| malqutmu'n
| malqutmu'nn
|-
! scope="row" | 2PL
| malqutmuoq
| malqutmuoqol
|-
! scope="row" | 3
| malqutmug
| malqutmugl
|-
! scope="row" | 3PL
| malqutmu'tiwgw
| malqutmu'tiwgwl
|-
|}

{| class="wikitable" style="text-align:center"
|+ VTI Negative Conjugation Class 1: -m class
|-
! scope="col" | ↓subject / object→
! scope="col" | 0SG
! scope="col" | 0PL
|-
! scope="row" | 1
| -mu
| -muann
|-
! scope="row" | 13
| -mueg
| -muegl
|-
! scope="row" | 12
|
|
|-
! scope="row" | 2
| -mu'n
| -mu'nn
|-
! scope="row" | 2PL
| -muoq
| -muoqol
|-
! scope="row" | 3
| -mug
| -mugl
|-
! scope="row" | 3PL
| -mu'tiwgw
| -mu'tiwgwl
|-
|}

== Imperative ==
Here is the formation of the affirmative imperative:
{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijji-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 2 Second person
| mijji
| ?
| mijjultiug
|-
|}

Now we compare it to the negated:
{| class="wikitable"
! ''mutt mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 2 Second person
| mutt mijjiew
| ?
| mutt mijjultineu
|-
|}

== Past Tense ==
Again for the past we compare the past and the negated past.

{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| mijjiap
| mijjieg'p
| mijjultieg'p
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| mijjiewg'p
| mijjultiewg'p
|-
| 2 Second person
| mijjit'p
| mijjiqop
| mijjultioqop
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| mijjip
| mijjpni'g
| mijjultpni'g
|}

Now let us look at the negated forms.

{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| mu mijjiewap
| mu mijjiewg'p
| mu mijjiewg'p
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| mu mijjiewg'p
| mu mijjiewg'p
|-
| 2 Second person
| mu mijjiewt'p
| mu mijjiewwaq'p
| mu mijjiewwaq'p
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| mu mijjug'p
| ?
| ?
|}

Thus this would be the conjugation of the negated form:

{| class="wikitable"
! Negated Past||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| -ewap
| -ewg'p
| -ewg'p
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| -ewg'p
| -ewg'p
|-
| 2 Second person
| -ewt'p
| -ewwaq'p
| -ewwaq'p
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| -ug'p
| ?
| ?
|}

For the third person the -''ug'p'' can change to -''ewgp'' for example:

<gl>
\gll Mu alasi-ew-g'p
not go-NEG-SG.PAST
\trans She didn't go
</gl>

== Future Tense ==
First let us compare the affirmative tense for eat:

{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| mijjias
| ?
| mijjit'snen
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
|
| mijjit'snu
|-
| 2 Second person
| mijjit's(g)
| ?
| mijjitoqs'p
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| mijjitew
| ''n/a''
| mijjultitaq
|}
I was not able to elicit dual forms.

We compare the future affirmative with the negated below:

{| class="wikitable"
! ''mijj-'' "eat"||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| ma mijjiew
| ma mijjiug
| ma mijjiug
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| ma mijjiug
| ma mijjiug
|-
| 2 Second person
| ma mijjiwn
| ?
| ?
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| ma mijjiewg
| ''n/a''
| ma mijjultiewoq
|}
NOTE: In the future the ''mu'' changes to ''ma'' !! Like ''mu'', ''ma'' must always come before the verb conjugated in the negative future.
The correspondent was not able to produce a dual form in the future.

Now here is a paradigm of the negated endings in the future.

{| class="wikitable"
! Negated Future||Singular||Dual||Plural
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| -ew
| -ug
| -ug
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
| -ug
| -ug
|-
| 2 Second person
| -iwn
| ?
| ?
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
| -ewg
| ''n/a''
| -ultiwoq
|}

As you may have noticed the future tense is easy! The verbs take the same endings as the negated present tense but the ''mu'' is replaced with ''ma'' thus indicating future.

== When negation is used ==

When the verb is negated there must always find a negative particle (like ''mu'' or ''ma''). If not the sentence is ungrammatical as shown below:

<gl>
\gll *gis-wissugwatige-w
can-cook.1-NEG
\trans I cannot cook (intended meaning)
</gl>

The only form of the above sentence must be:

<gl>
\gll ma gis-wissugwatige-w
NEG can-cook.1-NEG
\trans I cannot cook
</gl>

Thus it is seen that ''ma'' comes before the verb, now making the sentence grammatical.

''ma'' always precedes the future tense AND when the ''gis'' prefix is attached to the verb conjugated in the present for example:

<gl>
\gll ma gis-amalga-w-g
NEG can-dance-NEG-3
\trans s/he cannot dance
</gl>

There are some expressions that always take the negative form of the verb such as ''me menga'' (not yet) and ''mowen'' (nobody) that take the negative form of the verb: (examples from [http://www.mikmaqonline.org/ Mi'gmaq Online Dictionary])

<gl>
\gll me menag newt ajetten-u-g
NEG yet one time-NEG-3
\trans it is not one o’clock yet
</gl>

<gl>
\gll mo-wen mijie-w-g
NEG-who eat-NEG-3
\trans no one is eating
</gl>

<gl>
\gll moqwa' goqwei eign-u-g
no thing be-NEG-3
\trans there is nothing there
</gl>

Below is a list of common particles after which the negated form is used. This list is not complete but these are the most common forms.

{| class="wikitable"
! Particle || When used || Translation
|-
| ''mu''
| before negated present and past
| not
|-
| ''mutt''
| before negated imperative
| do not
|-
| ''lpa mu''
| before negated present and past
| not even
|-
| ''mowen''
| before negated present, past and future
| no one/nobody
|-
| ''moqwa' goqwei'''
| before negated present, past and future
| nothing
|-
| ''me menag''
| before negated verb
| not yet
|-
| ''ma''
| before negated future verb and preverb ''gis'' (can)
| not
|-
|}

''moqwa' goqwei'' is also spelled ''mu goqwei'' and a variant of this is ''mu'' + negated verb + ''goqwei'' when used in object position. It is inanimate. As in the following example:

<gl>
\gll mu malqutem-u goqwei
NEG eat.1>0-NEG what
\trans I eat nothing
</gl>

== Negative Concord ==
As can be seen above, Mi'gmaq is a negative concord language. Negative concord is where "double or multiple negative[s] [do] not express an affirmative but a negative" (van der Wouden & Zwarts, 1992). This is similar to French ''Je n'ai vue personne'' 'I have seen nobody' where both the ''ne'' and ''personne'' are both negative but the resulting sentence is negative, rather than each cancelling the other out resulting in a affirmative sentence, i.e. 'I have seen someone'. Mi'gmaq has negation marked in two places with both negative particles, i.e. ''mu'' & ''ma'', and a negative conjugation of the verb, i.e. with ''-u'' or ''-w'' added. Compare examples <glr id="1"/> and <glr id="2"/>.

<gl id="1">
\gll lpa'tuj eigu-p
boy be.there.PST-SG
\trans the boy was there
</gl>

<gl id="2">
\gll lpa'tuj mu eimu-g-u-p
boy NEG be.there-PST-NEG-SG
\trans the boy was not there
</gl>

= Word Order =
The negative particle (or possibly affix) ''mu'' always appears before the verb it negates. Although words can intervene between ''mu'' and the verb it negates, ''mu'' must always precede the verb.

<gl>
\gll Mali mu amal-gag-u-p
Mali NEG dance-PAST-NEG-SG
\trans Mali did not dance
</gl>

<gl>
\gll mu Mali amal-gag-u-p
NEG Mali dance-PAST-NEG-SG
\trans Mali did not dance
</gl>

Placement of ''mu'' post-verbally results in ungrammaticality, as illustrated below.

<gl>
\gll lpa'tuj mu eimug-u-p
boy NEG be.there.PST-NEG-SG
\trans the boy was not there
</gl>

Acceptable word orders:
*mu eimugup lpa'tuj
*mu lpa'tuj eimugup

Unacceptable word orders:
* *eimugup lpa'tuj mu
* *eimugup mu lpa'tuj
* *lpa'tuj eimugup mu

Furthermore, with regards to word order, it appears that negation must come right before the constituent it negates. Here is an example sentence without negation:

<gl>
\gll ula na lpa'tuj ta'n egitgup wigatign
this DEM boy that read.PST book
\trans this is the boy that read the book
</gl>

If we want to negate the first clause, as to say "This is '''not''' the boy that read the book", negation must directly precede 'boy'.

<gl>
\gll ula na mu lpa'tuj ta'n egitgup wigatign
this DEM NEG boy that read.PST book
\trans this is not the boy that read the book
</gl>

The following word orders for negation in the first clause are impossible:
* *ula na lpa'tuj mu...
* *ula mu na lpa'tuj...
* *mu ula na lpa'tuj...

If we want to negate the second clause, as to say "This is the boy that did '''not''' read the book", the word order may be varied, as long as negation comes before the verb (as discussed previously).

== Scope of Negation ==
As stated above, ''mu'' always comes before the verb. There may be particles that intrude between ''mu'' and the negated verb, but as long as ''mu'' comes before the negated verb, the structure is grammatical. [http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED136614.pdf Micmac Grammar, 1976] Sometimes the meaning of the sentence can change depending on the position of ''mu''.

<gl>
\gll egjitm Mali mu amal-gag-u-p
possible Mali NEG dance-PST-NEG-SG
\trans it is true that Mali did not dance
</gl>

<gl>
\gll mu egjitm Mali amal-gag-u-p
NEG possible Mali dance-PST.NEG.SG
\trans it is not true that Mali danced
</gl>

We would also expect phrases with adverb-like particles translatable as "it is possible" or "it is true" or "it is obvious" would also vary regarding negation.

=Language change and negation=
Often I was not able to elicit both the dual and plural forms of a verb. There are many times when I could only elicit the dual form, or times when the dual and plural forms were the same. It has been noted by our consultants that younger speakers are not using the plural forms but are using the dual form to mean both dual and plural. This seems be a language change happening currently in the speech community where the younger generation is leading the change. As noted in the paradigm above for 'eat' in the negated present tense, both dual and plural forms are the same. Here it seems that the plural form is used for both dual and plural meanings. This would strongly suggest a change happening in the speech community.

=References=
Clark, Jeremiah S. "A Dictionary of the Micmac Language." Rand's Micmac Dictionary. Charlottetown, PEI: The Patriot Publishing Company, 1902. Print.

Delisle, Gill L., and Manny L. Metallic. Micmac Teaching Grammar. Ecowi, QC: Thunderbird Press, 1976. Print.

L'Abbe Maillard, M. Grammaire De La Langue Mikmaque. New York: Presse Cramoisy de Jean-Marie Shea, 1864. Print.

Metallic, Janine. "Mi'gmaq Elicitation Session for Field Methods of Linguistics." Ed. Class, Carol Little and LING415. Montreal, QC: n/a, 2011. Print.

Payne, Thomas Edward. Describing Morphosyntax: a Guide for Field Linguists. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge UP, 2008. Print.

Paul-Martin, Patsy. "Mi'kmaq Verb Conjugation." Ed. Orthography, Mi'kmaq Talking Posters Smith/Francis. Truto, NS: Eastern Woodland Print Communications, 2011. Print.

Proulx, Paul. "Proto-Algonquian Verb Inflection." Studies in Native American Languages 15.2 (1990): 100-45. Print.

van der Wouden, Ton, and Frans Zwarts. "Negative Concord." D. Gilbers and S. Looyenga (eds), Language and Cognition 2. Yearbook 1992 Linguistic Theory and Knowledge Representation of the University of Groningen (1992): 317-31. Print.

Conversational Mi'gmaq

2014-06-16T23:14:14Z

Carol:

Below is a table of useful phrases in Mi'gmaq. Unlike in English, Mi'gmaq makes a distinction between you singular and you plural (similar to "y'all"). However, in the plural there is another distinction between you dual (two people) and you plural (three or more people). Thus, when speaking you must always make the distinction between if there is one, two, or 3+ people. For basic verb conjugations see [[VAI]]. For a guide on how to pronounce the following phrases see the [[Spelling]] page.

{| class="wikitable"
! English || Mi'gmaq || Notes
|-
| Hi
| Gwe'
|
|-
| Thank you
| Wela'lin
| One person to another person. Lit. 'I do well by you'
|-
| Thank you
| Wela'lioq
| One person to many people
|-
| Thank you
| Wela'lieg
| Two or more people to one or more people
|-
| Yes
| E'e
| pronounced "ehe"
|-
| No
| Moqwa'
|
|-
| What's up?
| Taliaq?
|
|-
| Not much
| Mu talianug
|
|-
| How are you?
| Me' talein?
| Asking one person
|-
| How are you?
| Me' talioq/taloltioq?
| Asking two people/asking three or more
|-
| I'm fine. And you?
| Welei. Gatu gi'l(ew)?
| Response to ''Me' talein?''. ''gi'l'' is second person singular, ''gi'lew'' is second person dual and plural.
|-
| Good morning!
| Weliegsitpu'g
|
|-
| Good night (before bed)
| Welimpa
| literally: sleep well
|-
| Happy birthday!
| Uliajipuna'!
|
|-
| What is your name?
| Taluisin (gi'l)?/Taluisioq (gilew)?/Taluisultioq gilew?
| To one person/to two people/to three or more people
|-
| My name is...
| Teluisi...
|
|-
| Where are you from?
| Tami tett tle'iawin?/tami tett tle'iawioq?/tami tett tle'iawultioq?
| To one person/to two people/to three or more people
|-
| I am from...
| Tle'iawi... -g
| the ''-g'' denotes location. Therefore if you were to say I am from Listuguj it would be ''Tle'iawi Listugujg''.
|-
| Let's eat!
| Mijjultinej!
|
|-
| I don't understand.
| Mu nestmu
|
|-
| Do you speak Mi'gmaq?
| 'Nnuisin?
| To one person
|-
| Yes, I speak Mi'gmaq
| E'e, 'nnuisi
|
|-
| No, but I understand.
| Moqwa, pasna nestasi.
|
|-
| How do you say ... in Mi'gmaq?
| Tal tluwen ... 'nnuigtug?
|
|-
| Speak to me in Mi'gmaq
| 'Nnugluli
|
|-
| Sorry
| Mesgei
|
|-
| I am so sorry
| Mawimsgei
|
|-
| Forgive me
| Apigsigtui
| This is used when you have done something very bad.
|-
|}

Conversational Mi'gmaq

2014-06-13T13:53:25Z

Carol:

Below is a table of useful phrases in Mi'gmaq. Unlike in English, Mi'gmaq makes a distinction between you singular and you plural (similar to "y'all"). However, in the plural there is another distinction between you dual (two people) and you plural (three or more people). Thus, when speaking you must always make the distinction between if there is one, two, or 3+ people. For basic verb conjugations see [[VAI]]. For a guide on how to pronounce the following phrases see the [[Spelling]] page.

{| class="wikitable"
! English || Mi'gmaq || Notes
|-
| Hi
| Gwe'
|
|-
| Thank you
| Wela'lin
| One person to another person. Lit. 'I do well by you'
|-
| Thank you
| Wela'lioq
| One person to many people
|-
| Thank you
| Wela'lieg
| Two or more people to one or more people
|-
| Yes
| E'e
| pronounced "ehe"
|-
| No
| Moqwa
|
|-
| What's up?
| Taliaq?
|
|-
| Not much
| Mu talianug
|
|-
| How are you?
| Me' talein?
| Asking one person
|-
| How are you?
| Me' talioq/talultioq?
| Asking two people/asking three or more
|-
| I'm fine. And you?
| Welei. Gatu gi'l(ew)?
| Response to ''Me' talein?''. ''gi'l'' is second person singular, ''gi'lew'' is second person dual and plural.
|-
| Good morning!
| Weliegsitpu'g
|
|-
| Good day!
| Weligisgeg!
|
|-
| Good night (before bed)
| Welimpa
| literally: sleep well
|-
| Happy birthday!
| Uliajipuna'!
|
|-
| What is your name?
| Taluisin (gi'l)?/Taluisioq (gilew)?/Taluisultioq gilew?
| To one person/to two people/to three or more people
|-
| My name is...
| Teluisi...
|
|-
| Where are you from?
| Tami tett tle'iawin?/tami tett tle'iawioq?/tami tett tle'iawultioq?
| To one person/to two people/to three or more people
|-
| I am from...
| Tle'iawi... -g
| the ''-g'' denotes location. Therefore if you were to say I am from Listuguj it would be ''Tle'iawi Listugujg''.
|-
| Let's go eat!
| Najjimijjinej!
|
|-
| I don't understand.
| Mu nestmu
|
|-
| Do you speak Mi'gmaq?
| 'Nnuisin?
| To one person
|-
| Yes, I speak Mi'gmaq
| E'e, 'nnuisi
|
|-
| No, but I understand.
| Moqwa, pasna nestasi.
|
|-
| How do you say ... in Mi'gmaq?
| Tal tluwen ... 'nnuigtug?
|
|-
| Speak to me in Mi'gmaq
| 'Nnugluli
|
|-
| Sorry
| Mesgei
|
|-
| I am so sorry
| Mawimsgei
|
|-
| Forgive me
| Apigsitui
| This is used when you have done something very bad.
|-
|}

Conversational Mi'gmaq

2014-06-13T13:52:39Z

Carol:

Below is a table of useful phrases in Mi'gmaq. Unlike in English, Mi'gmaq makes a distinction between you singular and you plural (similar to "y'all"). However, in the plural there is another distinction between you dual (two people) and you plural (three or more people). Thus, when speaking you must always make the distinction between if there is one, two, or 3+ people. For basic verb conjugations see [[VAI]]. For a guide on how to pronounce the following phrases see the [[Spelling]] page.

{| class="wikitable"
! English || Mi'gmaq || Notes
|-
| Hi
| Gwe'
|
|-
| Thank you
| Wela'lin
| One person to another person. Lit. 'I do well by you'
|-
| Thank you
| Wela'lioq
| One person to many people
|-
| Thank you
| Wela'lieg
| Two or more people to one or more people
|-
| Yes
| E'e
| pronounced "ehe"
|-
| No
| Moqwa
|
|-
| What's up?
| Taliaq?
|
|-
| Not much
| Mu talianug
|
|-
| How are you?
| Me' talein?
| Asking one person
|-
| How are you?
| Me' talioq/talultioq?
| Asking two people/asking three or more
|-
| I'm fine. And you?
| Welei. Gatu gi'l(ew)?
| Response to ''Me' talein?''. ''gi'l'' is second person singular, ''gi'lew'' is second person dual and plural.
|-
| Good morning!
| Weliegsipu'g
|
|-
| Good day!
| Weligisgeg!
|
|-
| Good night (before bed)
| Welimpa
| literally: sleep well
|-
| Happy birthday!
| Uliajipuna'!
|
|-
| What is your name?
| Taluisin (gi'l)?/Taluisioq (gilew)?/Taluisultioq gilew?
| To one person/to two people/to three or more people
|-
| My name is...
| Teluisi...
|
|-
| Where are you from?
| Tami tett tle'iawin?/tami tett tle'iawioq?/tami tett tle'iawultioq?
| To one person/to two people/to three or more people
|-
| I am from...
| Tle'iawi... -g
| the ''-g'' denotes location. Therefore if you were to say I am from Listuguj it would be ''Tle'iawi Listugujg''.
|-
| Let's go eat!
| Najjimijjinej!
|
|-
| I don't understand.
| Mu nestmu
|
|-
| Do you speak Mi'gmaq?
| 'Nnuisin?
| To one person
|-
| Yes, I speak Mi'gmaq
| E'e, 'nnuisi
|
|-
| No, but I understand.
| Moqwa, pasna nestasi.
|
|-
| How do you say ... in Mi'gmaq?
| Tal tluwen ... 'nnuigtug?
|
|-
| Speak to me in Mi'gmaq
| 'Nnugluli
|
|-
| Sorry
| Mesgei
|
|-
| I am so sorry
| Mawimsgei
|
|-
| Forgive me
| Apigsitui
| This is used when you have done something very bad.
|-
|}

Absentative

2014-02-05T17:37:35Z

Carol:

The absentative marker is also used in Mi'gmaq. Absentative markers are used when the person the speaker is talking about is either deceased or not present. This is primary used for those not present whom the speaker has not see for a long time and not someone the speaker has seen, for example, yesterday. This is used with the past tense ''-p'' marker.

Nemijgamij-aq teluisi-p-naq Sa'n-aq.
my.grandfather-ABS is.called-DIR-ABS Sa'n-ABS
\trans My grandfather's name was Sa'n.

Absentative

2014-02-05T17:34:56Z

Carol: Created page with "The absentative marker is also used in Mi'gmaq. Absentative markers are used when the person the speaker is talking about is either deceased or not present. This is primary used ..."

Discourse Particles

2014-02-05T16:40:22Z

Carol:

This page outlines the commonly used and heard discourse particles in Mi'gmaq. A discourse particle is " is a lexeme or particle which has no direct semantic meaning in the context of a sentence, having rather a pragmatic function: it serves to indicate the speaker's attitude, or to structure their interactions with other participants in a conversation"<ref>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Discourse_particle</ref>.

= ''na'' =
The discourse particle ''na'' is often heard and used. It is very useful. In various instances, it can be translated as a copular verb.

<gl>
\gll ula na ji'nm
this na man
\trans This is a man.
</gl>

<gl>
\gll ni'n na Piel
1 na Piel
\trans I am Piel
</gl>

<gl>
\gll ula na nmis
this na my.sister
\trans This is my (older) sister.
</gl>

= Refereces =
<references/>

Discourse Particles

2014-02-05T16:40:03Z

Carol:

Discourse Particles

2014-02-05T16:38:55Z

Carol: /* na */

Discourse Particles

2014-02-05T16:36:58Z

Carol:

Discourse Particles

2014-02-05T16:36:23Z

Carol:

Discourse Particles

2014-02-05T16:35:59Z

Carol: