Yoruba Relativization Fragment #
@cite{awobuluyi-1978} @cite{keenan-comrie-1979} @cite{ajiboye-2005}
Yoruba forms relative clauses with the introducer tí (high tone — distinct
from the toneless preverbal anteriority particle ti and the locative-source
preposition ti). Strategy varies by Accessibility-Hierarchy position:
subject and genitive use pronoun retention, direct object and most obliques
use gap.
@cite{awobuluyi-1978} §6.18-6.24 is the descriptive primary source (also the
work WALS F122A cites for Yoruba's .pronounRetention value).
@cite{keenan-comrie-1979} pp. 349-350 provides the K&C 1977 Table 1 codification
in exemplified form, with an analytical argument that the SU-position pronoun
ó is verb agreement rather than a true resumptive (a position the descriptive
Fragment doesn't commit to). K&C 1977 Table 1 p. 79 codes Yoruba as two
strategies: postnom -case (SU+DO) and postnom +case (GEN); IO/OBL/OComp coded
as * (does-not-exist-as-such, recast as DO via serial verb).
@cite{awobuluyi-1978} §6.24 explicitly rejects the traditional relative-pronoun
analysis of tí, treating it as an "introducer" (≈ complementizer in modern
terms). @cite{ajiboye-2005} §1.2.2 reaffirms a C-head analysis (in his case for
the M-tone ti found within genitive DPs, analyzed as a reduced relative).
@cite{awobuluyi-1978} §3.15 additionally shows that genitive-meaning
constructions without overt tí (e.g. owó Dàda "Dada's money") are derived
from relative-clause sources (owó tí Dàda ní "the money that Dada has"), so
the genitive relativization channel is widely available.
Data from @cite{awobuluyi-1978} §6.18–6.24, §3.15 + @cite{keenan-comrie-1979} ex. 125–128.
§6.19: Subject relativization. The relativized subject is replaced by the
high-tone third-person singular pronoun ó.
E.g. Ọkùnrin tí ó pè mí 'the man who called me'.
bearsCaseMarking := false per @cite{keenan-comrie-1979}'s analysis of
ó as verb agreement (K&C 1977 Table 1 p. 79 codes Yoruba's SU-strategy
as -case).
Equations
- One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
Instances For
§6.20: Direct object relativization. The relativized object is dropped
completely (gap strategy).
E.g. Ọkùnrin tí mo rí 'the man I saw'.
Equations
- One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
Instances For
§6.21–6.22: Oblique relativization. Awobuluyi splits this into two
sub-cases: the prepositions fi, ti, bá, fún, sí drop their
object completely (gap, §6.21); the preposition ní triggers complex
restructuring (drop + repositioning, with tí insertion for place
nouns and exceptions for wà/gbé, §6.22). The single-cell
RelClauseMarker.npRel cannot encode the split, so we record the
dominant pattern (gap) and document the ní case in notes.
E.g. Ọbẹ tí mo fi gé e 'the knife I cut it with'.
Equations
- One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
Instances For
§6.23: Genitive relativization. The relativized genitive qualifier is
replaced by rẹ̀ (singular) or wọn (plural) — pronoun retention.
E.g. Ọmọ tí olè jí ìwé rẹ̀ 'the child whose books were stolen';
Àwọn tí olè jí ìwé wọn 'those whose books were stolen'.
bearsCaseMarking := true per K&C 1977 Table 1 p. 79 (Strategy 2: postnom,
+case, GEN=+). The genitive-form pronouns rẹ̀/wọn are morphologically
distinct from subject ó and object i/un/ó, so per Awobuluyi §2.21's
polymorphic-noun classification they encode their case role lexically.
Equations
- One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
Instances For
All Yoruba relative clause markers, anchored to @cite{awobuluyi-1978}
§6.19–6.23 + @cite{keenan-comrie-1979} ex. 125–128. All four share the
introducer tí (high tone, §6.18).
Equations
Instances For
Yoruba relativization profile (typological summary).
Equations
- One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.