Difference between revisions of "Negation"

From Mi'gmaq Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
 
(61 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown)
Line 2: Line 2:
 
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.  
 
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''. Unless otherwise noted all orthographical conventions are those of Listuguj.  
+
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 they particles express a negated idea.
+
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.
 
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.
 
Unless otherwise noted, all data below is my own, elicited from the correspondent, Janine Metallic.
 
  
 
= Conjugation of the Negated Verb =
 
= Conjugation of the Negated Verb =
Line 34: Line 32:
 
|-
 
|-
 
! scope="row" |  12
 
! scope="row" |  12
| mijjiewg
+
| mijji'gw
| mijjultiewg
+
| mijjulti'gw
 
|-
 
|-
 
! scope="row" colspan="2" |  2
 
! scope="row" colspan="2" |  2
Line 59: Line 57:
 
! scope="row" rowspan="2"|  1
 
! scope="row" rowspan="2"|  1
 
! scope="row"| 13
 
! scope="row"| 13
| rowspan="2" | mu mijjiu
+
| rowspan="2" | mu mijjiw
| mu mijjultieweg
+
| mu mijjiweg
| mu mijjultieweg
+
| mu mijjultiweg
 
|-
 
|-
 
! scope="row" |  12
 
! scope="row" |  12
| mu  mijjultieweg
+
| mu  mijjigw
| mu mijjultieweg
+
| mu mijjultigw
 
|-
 
|-
 
! scope="row" colspan="2" |  2
 
! scope="row" colspan="2" |  2
 
| mu mijjiun
 
| mu mijjiun
 
| mu mijjiwoq
 
| mu mijjiwoq
| mu mijjuwoq
+
| mu mijjultiwoq
 
|-
 
|-
 
! scope="row" colspan="2"|  3
 
! scope="row" colspan="2"|  3
| mu mijjiug
+
| mu mijjigw
| mu mijjiewg
+
| mu mijji'gw
| mu mijjiultiewg
+
| mu mijjulti'gw
 
|-
 
|-
 
|}
 
|}
Line 81: Line 79:
 
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.  
 
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 the table for negated present conjugation. Inanimate conjugation was taken from the Micmac Grammar (1976, pg 155).  
+
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"
 
{| class="wikitable"
! Negated Present ||Singular||Dual||Plural
+
|+ VAI -i stem negative present person endings
 
|-
 
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
+
! scope="col" colspan="2"| ↓person / number→
| -u
+
! scope="col" | SG
| -ultieweg
+
! scope="col" | DU
| -ultieweg
+
! scope="col" | PL
 +
|-
 +
! scope="row" rowspan="2"|  1
 +
! scope="row"| 13
 +
| rowspan="2" |-u
 +
| -
 +
| -
 
|-
 
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
+
! scope="row" | 12
| ''n/a''
+
| -
| -ultieweg
+
| -
| -ultieweg
 
 
|-
 
|-
| 2 Second person
+
! scope="row" colspan="2" | 2
| -un
+
| -
| -woq
+
| -
| -uwoq
+
| -
 
|-
 
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
+
! scope="row" colspan="2"| 3.AN
| -ug
+
| -
| -ewg
+
| -
| -ultiewg
+
| -
 
|-
 
|-
| 3 Third person (inanimate)
+
! scope="row" colspan="2"| 3.IN
| -nug
+
| -
| -nugel
+
| -
| -nultinugel
+
| -
 
|-
 
|-
 
|}
 
|}
  
As you may have noticed, 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).
+
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).
+
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"
 
{| class="wikitable"
! Verb Type || Base Form || Affirmative || Negated || Translation
+
! VAI stem || Base Form || Gloss || Affirmative || Gloss || Negated || Gloss
 
|-
 
|-
 
| -i
 
| -i
 
| mijji-
 
| mijji-
 +
| eat
 
| mijjit
 
| mijjit
| mu mijjiug
+
| s/he eats
| eat
+
| mu mijjigw
 +
| s/he does not eat
 
|-
 
|-
 
| -a
 
| -a
 
| amalga-
 
| amalga-
 +
| dance
 
| amalgat
 
| amalgat
| mu amalgawg
+
| s/he dances
| dance
+
| mu amalgagw
 +
| s/he does not dance
 
|-
 
|-
| -asi
+
| -a'si
| alasi-
+
| ala'si-
| alasit
 
| mu alasiewgw
 
 
| go around
 
| go around
 +
| ala'sit
 +
| s/he goes around
 +
| mu ala'sigw
 +
| s/he does not go around
 
|-
 
|-
 
| -e
 
| -e
 
| elie-
 
| elie-
 +
| go
 
| eliet
 
| eliet
 +
| s/he goes
 
| mu eliegw
 
| mu eliegw
| go
+
| s/he does not go
 
|-
 
|-
 
|}
 
|}
Line 151: Line 162:
 
Below is the conjugation in present of a transitive verb that takes an inanimate object.  
 
Below is the conjugation in present of a transitive verb that takes an inanimate object.  
  
{| class="wikitable"
+
{| class="wikitable" style="text-align:center"
! ''malq-'' " not eat, Transitive Inanimate"||Singular||Dual||Plural
+
|+ 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
 
|-
 
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
+
! scope="row" | 12
| malqutum
+
| malqutmu'g
| malqutemeg
+
| malqutmu'gul
| malqutemeg
 
 
|-
 
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
+
! scope="row" | 2
| ''n/a''
+
| malqutmn
| malqutemug
+
| malqutmnn
| malqutemug
 
 
|-
 
|-
| 2 Second person
+
! scope="row" | 2PL
| malqutemin
 
| malqutmoq
 
 
| malqutmoq
 
| malqutmoq
 +
| malqutmoqol
 
|-
 
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
+
! scope="row" | 3
| malqut
+
| malqutmeg
| malqutmitij
+
| malqutmegl
| malqutmitig
 
 
|-
 
|-
 +
! scope="row" | 3PL
 +
| malqutmi'tij
 +
| malqutmi'titl
 
|}
 
|}
  
Here it is negated:
+
{| class="wikitable" style="text-align:center"
{| class="wikitable"
+
|+ VTI Negative Conjugation Class 1: -m class
! ''mu malq-'' " not eat, Transitive Inanimate"||Singular||Dual||Plural
+
|-
 +
! 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
 
|-
 
|-
| 1 First person (exclusive)
+
! scope="row" | 2
| mu malqutumu
+
| mu malqutmu'n
| mu malqutumueg
+
| mu malqutmu'nn
| mu malqutumueg
 
 
|-
 
|-
| 12 First person (inclusive)
+
! scope="row" | 2PL
| ''n/a''
+
| mu malqutmuoq
| mu malqutemu'g
+
|  mu malqutmuoqol
| mu malqutemu'g
 
 
|-
 
|-
| 2 Second person
+
! scope="row" | 3
| mu malqutemun
+
| mu malqutmug
| mu malqutmuoq
+
| mu malqutmugul
| mu malqutmuoq
 
 
|-
 
|-
| 3 Third person (animate)
+
! scope="row" | 3PL
| mu malqutumug
+
| mu malqutmi'tigw
| mu malqutmiti'ewg
+
| mu malqutmi'tigul
| mu malqutmiti'ewg
 
 
|-
 
|-
 
|}
 
|}
  
Because of the extensive complexity of the verb endings in Mi'gmaq I was only able to elicit a very, very small portion of the forms. Below are the other transitive verb forms I elicited.
 
  
{| class="wikitable"
+
{| class="wikitable" style="text-align:center"
! Affirmative||Negated||Translation (of negated form)
+
|+ VTI Negative Conjugation Class 1: -m class
 +
|-
 +
! scope="col" | ↓subject / object→
 +
! scope="col" | 0SG
 +
! scope="col" | 0PL
 +
|-
 +
! scope="row" | 1
 +
| -
 +
| -
 
|-
 
|-
| nimisi
+
! scope="row" | 13
| mu nimisiew
+
| -
| I do not see myself
+
| -
 
|-
 
|-
| nimilin
+
! scope="row" | 12
| mu nimiliu'n
+
|  
| you (sg) do not see me
+
|  
 
|-
 
|-
| nimili'oq
+
! scope="row" | 2
| mu nimiliuoq
+
| -
| you (plural) do not see me
+
| -
 
|-
 
|-
| nimilit
+
! scope="row" | 2PL
| mu nimiliugw
+
| -
| he sees me
+
| -
 
|-
 
|-
| nemi'g
+
! scope="row" | 3
| mu nemiaq
+
| -
| I do not see him
+
| -
 +
|-
 +
! scope="row" | 3PL
 +
| -
 +
| -
 
|-
 
|-
 
|}
 
|}
 
As hypothesized earlier the negated affix comes before the person (i.e. singular or plural) when conjugating. I do not have enough information to create any kind of paradigm here for lack of time. As I myself came to realize along with others trying to come up with a concise grammar of Mi'gmaq, "it seems almost impossible to deal with [the verb] satisfactorily  in a brief treatise, as volumes might be written upon it" (Clark, 1902).
 
  
 
== Imperative ==
 
== Imperative ==
Line 238: Line 280:
 
| 2 Second person
 
| 2 Second person
 
| mijji
 
| mijji
| ?
+
| mijjigw
| mijjultiug
+
| mijjultigw
 
|-
 
|-
 
|}
 
|}
Line 248: Line 290:
 
|-
 
|-
 
| 2 Second person
 
| 2 Second person
| mutt mijjiew
+
| mutt mijjiw
| ?
+
| mutt mijjinew
| mutt mijjultineu
+
| mutt mijjultinew
 
|-
 
|-
 
|}
 
|}
 
I was unable to elicit any other forms.
 
  
 
== Past Tense ==
 
== Past Tense ==
Line 269: Line 309:
 
| 12 First person (inclusive)
 
| 12 First person (inclusive)
 
| ''n/a''
 
| ''n/a''
| mijjiewg'p
+
| mijji'gup
| mijjultiewg'p
+
| mijjulti'gup
 
|-
 
|-
 
| 2 Second person
 
| 2 Second person
 
| mijjit'p
 
| mijjit'p
| mijjiqop
+
| mijjioqop
 
| mijjultioqop
 
| mijjultioqop
 
|-
 
|-
 
| 3 Third person (animate)
 
| 3 Third person (animate)
 
| mijjip
 
| mijjip
| mijjpni'g
+
| mijjipnig
| mijjultpni'g
+
| mijjultipnig
 
|}
 
|}
  
Line 289: Line 329:
 
|-
 
|-
 
| 1 First person (exclusive)
 
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| mu mijjiewap
+
| mu mijjiwap
| mu mijjiewg'p
+
| mu mijjiweg'p
| mu mijjiewg'p
+
| mu mijjultiweg'p
 
|-
 
|-
 
| 12 First person (inclusive)
 
| 12 First person (inclusive)
 
| ''n/a''
 
| ''n/a''
| mu  mijjiewg'p
+
| mu  mijjiwgup
| mu mijjiewg'p
+
| mu mijjultiwgup/mijjultiggup
 
|-
 
|-
 
| 2 Second person
 
| 2 Second person
| mu mijjiewt'p
+
| mu mijjiwt'p
| mu mijjiewwaq'p
+
| mu mijjiwoqop
| mu mijjiewwaq'p
+
| mu mijjultiwoqop
 
|-
 
|-
 
| 3 Third person (animate)
 
| 3 Third person (animate)
| mu mijjug'p
+
| mu mijjigup
| ?
+
| mu mijjigupnig
| ?
+
| mu mijjultigupnig
 
|}
 
|}
  
Line 315: Line 355:
 
|-
 
|-
 
| 1 First person (exclusive)
 
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| -ewap
+
| -
| -ewg'p
+
| -
| -ewg'p
+
| -
 
|-
 
|-
 
| 12 First person (inclusive)
 
| 12 First person (inclusive)
 
| ''n/a''
 
| ''n/a''
| -ewg'p
+
| -
| -ewg'p
+
| -
 
|-
 
|-
 
| 2 Second person
 
| 2 Second person
| -ewt'p
+
| -
| -ewwaq'p
+
| -
| -ewwaq'p
+
| -
 
|-
 
|-
 
| 3 Third person (animate)
 
| 3 Third person (animate)
| -ug'p
+
| -
| ?
+
|  
| ?
+
|  
 
|}
 
|}
  
For the third person the -''ug'p'' can change to -''ewgp'' for example:
+
For the third person the -''ug'p'' can change to -''weg'p'' for example:
  
 
<gl>
 
<gl>
\gll Mu alasi-ew-g'p
+
\gll Mu ala'ti-we-g'p
 
not go-NEG-SG.PAST
 
not go-NEG-SG.PAST
 
\trans She didn't go
 
\trans She didn't go
Line 344: Line 384:
  
 
== Future Tense ==
 
== Future Tense ==
First let us compare the affirmative tense for eat:  
+
Affirmative:  
  
 
{| class="wikitable"
 
{| class="wikitable"
Line 350: Line 390:
 
|-
 
|-
 
| 1 First person (exclusive)
 
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| mijjias
+
| mijjit's/mijjia's(List)
| ?
+
| mijjitesnen
| mijjit'snen
+
| mijjultitesnen
 
|-
 
|-
 
| 12 First person (inclusive)
 
| 12 First person (inclusive)
 
| ''n/a''
 
| ''n/a''
|  
+
| mijjitesnu
| mijjit'snu
+
| mijjultitesnu
 
|-
 
|-
 
| 2 Second person
 
| 2 Second person
| mijjit's(g)
+
| mijjit'sg
| ?
 
 
| mijjitoqs'p
 
| mijjitoqs'p
 +
| mijjultitoqs'p
 
|-
 
|-
 
| 3 Third person (animate)
 
| 3 Third person (animate)
 
| mijjitew
 
| mijjitew
| ''n/a''
+
| mijjitaq
 
| mijjultitaq
 
| mijjultitaq
 
|}
 
|}
I was not able to elicit dual forms.
 
 
  
We compare the future affirmative with the negated below:
+
Negated:
  
 
{| class="wikitable"
 
{| class="wikitable"
Line 378: Line 416:
 
|-
 
|-
 
| 1 First person (exclusive)
 
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| ma mijjiew
+
| ma' mijjiw
| ma mijjiug
+
| ma' mijjiweg
| ma mijjiug
+
| ma' mijjultiweg
 
|-
 
|-
 
| 12 First person (inclusive)
 
| 12 First person (inclusive)
 
| ''n/a''
 
| ''n/a''
| ma mijjiug
+
| ma' mijjigw
| ma mijjiug
+
| ma' mijjultigw
 
|-
 
|-
 
| 2 Second person
 
| 2 Second person
| ma mijjiwn
+
| ma' mijjiun
| ?
+
| ma' mijjiwoq
| ?
+
| ma' mijjultiwoq
 
|-
 
|-
 
| 3 Third person (animate)
 
| 3 Third person (animate)
| ma mijjiewg
+
| ma' mijjigw
| ''n/a''
+
| ma' mijji'gw
| ma mijjultiewoq
+
| 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.
+
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.  
+
Paradigm of the negated endings in the future.  
  
 
{| class="wikitable"
 
{| class="wikitable"
Line 406: Line 443:
 
|-
 
|-
 
| 1 First person (exclusive)
 
| 1 First person (exclusive)
| -ew
+
| -
| -ug
+
| -
| -ug
+
| -
 
|-
 
|-
 
| 12 First person (inclusive)
 
| 12 First person (inclusive)
| ''n/a''
+
|  
| -ug
+
| -
| -ug
+
| -
 
|-
 
|-
 
| 2 Second person
 
| 2 Second person
| -iwn
+
| -
| ?
+
|  
| ?
+
|  
 
|-
 
|-
 
| 3 Third person (animate)
 
| 3 Third person (animate)
| -ewg
+
|  
| ''n/a''
+
|  
| -ultiwoq
+
|  
 
|}
 
|}
  
Line 434: Line 471:
 
<gl>
 
<gl>
 
\gll *gis-wissugwatige-w
 
\gll *gis-wissugwatige-w
can-cook-NEG
+
can-cook.1-NEG
 
\trans I cannot cook (intended meaning)
 
\trans I cannot cook (intended meaning)
 
</gl>
 
</gl>
Line 441: Line 478:
  
 
<gl>
 
<gl>
\gll ma gis-wissugwatige-w
+
\gll ma' gis-wissugwatige-w
 
NEG can-cook.1-NEG
 
NEG can-cook.1-NEG
\trans I cannot cook
+
\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>
 
</gl>
  
Thus it is seen that ''ma'' comes before the verb, now making the sentence grammatical.  
+
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:
+
''ma' '' always precedes the future tense AND when the ''gis'' prefix is attached to the verb conjugated in the present for example:
  
 
<gl>
 
<gl>
\gll Ma gis-amalga-w-g
+
\gll ma' gis-amalga-w-g
 
NEG can-dance-NEG-3
 
NEG can-dance-NEG-3
\trans S/he cannot dance
+
\trans s/he cannot dance
 
</gl>
 
</gl>
  
Line 459: Line 502:
  
 
<gl>
 
<gl>
\gll Me menag newt ajetten-u-g
+
\gll me' mnaq newt ajiegw
Not yet one time-NEG-3
+
NEG yet one time-NEG-3
\trans It is not one o’clock yet
+
\trans it is not one o’clock yet
 
</gl>
 
</gl>
  
 
<gl>
 
<gl>
\gll Mo-wen mijie-w-g
+
\gll mu-wen mijji-gw
No-who eat-NEG-3
+
NEG-who eat-NEG-3
\trans No one is eating
+
\trans no one is eating
 
</gl>
 
</gl>
  
 
<gl>
 
<gl>
\gll Moqwa' goqwei eign-u-g
+
\gll mu goqwei etn-u-g
Noth ing is-NEG-3
+
no thing be-NEG-3
\trans There is nothing there
+
\trans there is nothing there
 
</gl>
 
</gl>
  
Line 490: Line 533:
 
| do not
 
| do not
 
|-
 
|-
| ''lpa mu''
+
| '''lpa mu''
 
| before negated present and past
 
| before negated present and past
 
| not even
 
| not even
 
|-
 
|-
| ''mowen''
+
| ''mu wen''
 
| before negated present, past and future
 
| before negated present, past and future
| no one/nobdoy
+
| no one/nobody
 
|-
 
|-
| ''moqw'a goqwei'''
+
| ''mu goqwei'''
 
| before negated present, past and future
 
| before negated present, past and future
 
| nothing
 
| nothing
 
|-
 
|-
| ''me menag''
+
| ''me' mnaq''
 
| before negated verb
 
| before negated verb
 
| not yet
 
| not yet
 
|-
 
|-
| ''ma''
+
| ''ma' ''
 
| before negated future verb and preverb ''gis'' (can)
 
| before negated future verb and preverb ''gis'' (can)
 
| not
 
| not
Line 512: Line 555:
 
|}
 
|}
  
''moqw'a goqwei'' is also spelled ''mu goqwei'' and a variant of this is ''mu'' + negated verb + ''goqwei'' when used in object position. It is inanimate. See below example:
+
''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>
 
<gl>
\gll Mu malqute-m-u goqwei
+
\gll mu malqutm-u goqwei
not eat-1>0-NEG what
+
NEG eat.1>0-NEG what
 
\trans I eat nothing
 
\trans I eat nothing
 
</gl>
 
</gl>
  
 
== Negative Concord ==
 
== Negative Concord ==
As exemplified above, Mi'gmaq is a negative concord language. Negative concord is where "double or multiple negative does not express an affirmative but a negative" (van der Wouden & Zwarts, 1992). This is not unlike the process in French where I have seen nobody is 'Je ''n'''ai vue ''personne'' where both the ''ne'' and ''personne'' ' express a negative, but although seemingly illogical, this is in fact expresses a negative sentence rather than an affirmative. There is both a negative particle and the verb is then conjugated in the negated tense. This is a double negation because there is both a negative particle, for example ''mu'', then the verb mus
+
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"/>.
  
= Word Order =
+
<gl id="1">
Negation is marked in Mi'gmaq with the negative particle (or possibly affix) ''mu'' "not", which is always located before the verb it negates. Although ''mu'' and the verb it negates can be separated (flexible word order), ''mu'' must always precede the verb. Placement of it post-verbally results in ungrammaticality, as illustrated below.
+
\gll 'lpa'tuj eig'-p
 
+
boy be.there.PST-SG
<gl>
+
\trans the boy was there
\gll mu geiwetetm-u-ap
 
not remember-NEG-SG
 
\trans I did not remember
 
 
</gl>
 
</gl>
  
 
<gl id="2">
 
<gl id="2">
\gll lpa'tuj mu eimug-u-p
+
\gll 'lpa'tuj mu eimu-g-u-p
boy NEG is.there.PAST-NEG-SG
+
boy NEG be.there-PST-NEG-SG
\trans The boy was not there.
+
\trans the boy was not there
 
</gl>
 
</gl>
  
Possible word order:
+
= Word Order =
*mu eimugup lpa'tuj
+
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.
*mu lpa'tuj eimugup
 
 
 
Impossible word order:
 
* *eimugup lpa'tuj mu
 
* *eimugup mu lpa'tuj
 
* *lpa'tuj eimugup mu
 
  
 
+
<gl>
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:
+
\gll Mali mu amal-gag-u-p
 +
Mali NEG dance-PAST-NEG-SG
 +
\trans Mali did not dance
 +
</gl>
  
 
<gl>
 
<gl>
\gll ula na lpa'tuj tan egitgup wigatign
+
\gll mu Mali amal-gag-u-p
this DEM boy that read.PAST book
+
NEG Mali dance-PAST-NEG-SG
\trans This is the boy that read the book.
+
\trans Mali did not dance
 
</gl>
 
</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'.
+
Placement of ''mu'' post-verbally results in ungrammaticality, as illustrated below.
  
 
<gl>
 
<gl>
\gll ula na mu lpa'tuj tan egitgup wigatign
+
\gll 'lpa'tuj mu eimug-u-p
this DEM NEG boy that read.PAST book
+
boy NEG be.there.PST-NEG-SG
\trans This is not the boy that read the book.
+
\trans the boy was not there
 
</gl>
 
</gl>
  
The following word orders for negation in the first clause are impossible:
+
Acceptable word orders:  
* *ula na lpa'tuj mu...
+
*mu eimugup 'lpa'tuj
* *ula mu na lpa'tuj...
+
*mu 'lpa'tuj eimugup
* *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).
+
Unacceptable word orders:
 +
* *eimugup 'lpa'tuj mu
 +
* *eimugup mu 'lpa'tuj
 +
* *'lpa'tuj eimugup mu
  
It seems that Mi'gmaq has Negative Concord. Compare examples <glr id="1"/> and <glr id="2"/>.  
+
 
 +
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>
 
<gl>
\gll app mu nege eigm-u-g
+
\gll ula na 'lpa'tuj ta'n egitg'p wi'gatign
again NEG now is.there.NEG-SG
+
this DEM boy that read.PST book
ʌp mu nɛge eikmuk
+
\trans this is the boy that read the book
\trans Again, it isn't there now.
 
 
</gl>
 
</gl>
  
<gl id="1">
+
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'.
\gll lpa'tuj eigu-p
 
boy is.there.PAST-SG
 
\trans The boy was there.
 
</gl>
 
 
 
<gl id="2">
 
\gll lpa'tuj mu eimu-g-u-p
 
boy NEG is.there-PAST-NEG-SG
 
\trans The boy was not there.
 
</gl>
 
  
== 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]
 
 
 
<gl>
 
<gl>
\gll Mali mu amal-gag-u-p
+
\gll ula na mu 'lpa'tuj ta'n egitg'p wi'gatign
Mali NEG dance-PAST-NEG-SG
+
this DEM NEG boy that read.PST book
\trans Mali did not dance.
+
\trans this is not the boy that read the book
 
</gl>
 
</gl>
  
<gl>
+
The following word orders for negation in the first clause are impossible: *TO CHECK
\gll Mu Mali amal-gag-u-p
+
* *ula na 'lpa'tuj mu...
NEG Mali dance-PAST-NEG-SG
+
* *ula mu na 'lpa'tuj...
\trans Mali did not dance.
+
* *mu ula na 'lpa'tuj...
</gl>
 
  
Sometimes the meaning of the sentence can change depending on the position of ''mu''.
+
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>
 
  <gl>
\gll Egjitm Mali mu amal-gag-u-p
+
\gll 'gjitm Mali mu amal-gag-u-p
possible Mali NEG dance-PAST-NEG-SG
+
possible Mali NEG dance-PST-NEG-SG
\trans It is true that Mali did not dance.
+
\trans it is true that Mali did not dance
 
</gl>
 
</gl>
  
<gl>
+
*CHECK MORE
\gll Mu egjitm Mali amal-gag-u-p
 
NEG possible Mali dance-PAST.NEG.SG
 
\trans It is not true that Mali danced.
 
</gl>
 
  
See also [http://prosodylab.org/migmaq/index.php/Word_Order_%26_Information_Structure#Interaction_with_negation Word Order and Interaction with Negation]
 
 
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.
 
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=
 
=Language change and negation=
I have encountered many times not being able to elicit both the dual and plural forms of a verb. There are many times where I can only elicit the dual form, or times when the dual and plural forms are exactly alike. It had been noted before in the class that a lot of younger speakers are not using the plural form and 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 towards the preference of the dual form for denoting both dual and plural. Though as noted above in the [http://prosodylab.org/migmaq/index.php/Negation#Present_Tense paradigm] for the eat in the negated present tense both dual and plural forms are the same. Here it seems to be the plural form presiding over the dual form. This would strongly suggest a change happening in the speech community.
+
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.
 
 
=Notes=
 
As I am sure everyone else encountered during this course, I was unable to get a full paradigm of all the possible verb conjugations (transitive animate, transitive inanimate, intransitive etc) and all tenses (subjunctive case as well as conditional, among others, is missing though I know Mi'gmaq has these cases, (see Grammaire de la Langue Micmaque, 1864, pg 33-100 for full verb paradigms)). Instead I tried to focus on the data I had and compare it with other sources in order to be able to achieve accuracy as well as accessibility to those wanting to learn the language.
 
 
 
For the future, I would hope to elicit more verb paradigms as well as more about the scope of negation.
 
  
 
=References=
 
=References=

Latest revision as of 06:36, 19 August 2014

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 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 ( 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 (Micmac Teaching Grammar, 1976). I have selected the spelling from 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 (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').

mijji- 'eat'
↓person / number→ SG DU PL
1 13 mijji mijjieg mijjultieg
12 mijji'gw mijjulti'gw
2 mijjin mijjioq mijjultioq
3 mijjit mijjijig mijjultijig
mu mijji- 'not eat'
↓person / number→ SG DU PL
1 13 mu mijjiw mu mijjiweg mu mijjultiweg
12 mu mijjigw mu mijjultigw
2 mu mijjiun mu mijjiwoq mu mijjultiwoq
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).

VAI -i stem negative present person endings
↓person / number→ SG DU PL
1 13 -u - -
12 - -
2 - - -
3.AN - - -
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.

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 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.

VTI Conjugation Class 1: -m class
↓subject / object→ 0SG 0PL
1 malqutm malqutmann
13 malqutmeg malqutmegl
12 malqutmu'g malqutmu'gul
2 malqutmn malqutmnn
2PL malqutmoq malqutmoqol
3 malqutmeg malqutmegl
3PL malqutmi'tij malqutmi'titl
VTI Negative Conjugation Class 1: -m class
↓subject / object→ 0SG 0PL
1 mu malqutmu mu malqutmuann
13 mu malqutmueg mu malqutmuegl
12 mu malqutmugg mu malqutmuggul
2 mu malqutmu'n mu malqutmu'nn
2PL mu malqutmuoq mu malqutmuoqol
3 mu malqutmug mu malqutmugul
3PL mu malqutmi'tigw mu malqutmi'tigul


VTI Negative Conjugation Class 1: -m class
↓subject / object→ 0SG 0PL
1 - -
13 - -
12
2 - -
2PL - -
3 - -
3PL - -

Imperative

Here is the formation of the affirmative imperative:

mijji- "eat" Singular Dual Plural
2 Second person mijji mijjigw mijjultigw

Now we compare it to the negated:

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.

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.

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:

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:

  1. Mu   ala'ti-we-g'p   
    not  go-NEG-SG.PAST  
    'She didn't go'

Future Tense

Affirmative:

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:

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.

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:

  1. *gis-wissugwatige-w  
    can-cook.1-NEG       
    'I cannot cook (intended meaning)'

The only form of the above sentence must be:

  1. ma'  gis-wissugwatige-w  
    NEG  can-cook.1-NEG      
    'I cannot cook at this time'
  1. mu              gis-wissugwatige-w  
    can-cook.1-NEG                      
    'I am unable to cook (something is preventing me from cooking)'

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:

  1. ma'  gis-amalga-w-g   
    NEG  can-dance-NEG-3  
    's/he cannot dance'

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 Mi'gmaq Online Dictionary)

  1. me'  mnaq  newt  ajiegw      
    NEG  yet   one   time-NEG-3  
    'it is not one o’clock yet'
  1. mu-wen   mijji-gw   
    NEG-who  eat-NEG-3  
    'no one is eating'
  1. mu  goqwei  etn-u-g   
    no  thing   be-NEG-3  
    'there is nothing there'


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.

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:

  1. mu   malqutm-u    goqwei  
    NEG  eat.1>0-NEG  what    
    'I eat nothing'

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 (10) and (11).

  1. 'lpa'tuj  eig'-p           
    boy       be.there.PST-SG  
    'the boy was there'
  1. 'lpa'tuj  mu   eimu-g-u-p           
    boy       NEG  be.there-PST-NEG-SG  
    'the boy was not there'

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.

  1. Mali  mu   amal-gag-u-p       
    Mali  NEG  dance-PAST-NEG-SG  
    'Mali did not dance'
  1. mu   Mali  amal-gag-u-p       
    NEG  Mali  dance-PAST-NEG-SG  
    'Mali did not dance'

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

  1. 'lpa'tuj  mu   eimug-u-p            
    boy       NEG  be.there.PST-NEG-SG  
    'the boy was not there'

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:

  1. ula   na   'lpa'tuj  ta'n  egitg'p   wi'gatign  
    this  DEM  boy       that  read.PST  book       
    'this is the boy that read the book'

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'.

  1. ula   na   mu   'lpa'tuj  ta'n  egitg'p   wi'gatign  
    this  DEM  NEG  boy       that  read.PST  book       
    'this is not the boy that read the book'

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. Micmac Grammar, 1976 Sometimes the meaning of the sentence can change depending on the position of mu.

  1. 'gjitm    Mali  mu   amal-gag-u-p      
    possible  Mali  NEG  dance-PST-NEG-SG  
    'it is true that Mali did not dance'
  • 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.