Documentation

Linglib.Studies.TaraldsenEtAl2018

Taraldsen, Taraldsen Medová & Langa (2018): class prefixes as specifiers #

[TTML18] (NLLT 36, 1339–1394) analyzes Southern Bantu noun-class prefixes as morphemes lexicalizing phrasal Specifiers built around a silent classifier-like noun Nₓ — [Nₓ] for singulars, [# Nₓ] for plurals ((48)–(50), pp. 1357–1358) — rather than single functional heads. Agreement with conjoined singular subjects (§2) shows which singular/plural class pairs share one N (Xhosa: 1/2, 7/8, 9/10) and which pair distinct Ns (3/4, 5/6). Where the plural entry's N is distinct and the language cannot merge it directly with the root, the Foot Condition blocks direct spellout and Starke-style backtracking yields prefix stacking: Changana/Rhonga mi-mu-twa 'thorns', ma-rhi-tu 'words', ti-yi-n-dlu 'houses' ((62), p. 1361, from [Bac06]). Xhosa instead first-merges the plural N ((82)–(83), p. 1366) and never stacks.

Main declarations #

The bridge to [Car26]'s interpretable-gender agreement diagnostic lives in Linglib.Studies.Carstens2026 (the later paper hosts the comparison). The paper's DM comparison (§3.4, portmanteaux and Fusion) is not yet formalized.

Feature inventory #

Nominal features on the Bantu nanosyntactic structures: num is the number head #, cls n the classifier-like silent noun Nₙ. Singular prefixes lexicalize [Nₓ]; plural prefixes lexicalize [# Nₓ] ((48)–(50), pp. 1357–1358).

Instances For
    Equations
    • One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
    Instances For

      The Xhosa lexicon #

      Exponents are the paper's analytical units — the post-augment prefix (p. 1340 restricts "prefix" to exclude the augment; surface u-m-, a-ba- etc. add the augment vowel). Entries by gender pair:

      gendersgtreesourcepltreesource
      A (1/2)m[N₁](48a)ba[# N₁](48b)
      B (3/4)m[N₃]implied, cf. (25a), p. 1358mi[# N₄](41a)
      C (5/6)li[N₅](50a)ma[# N₆](50b)
      D (7/8)si[N₇](49a)zi[# N₇](49b)
      E (9/10)n[N₉]the homorganic nasal, set aside in fn. 39zi[# N₉]implied by §2.3, fn. 40

      Class-10 zi is accidentally syncretic with class-8 zi (fn. 11); it must contain N₉ because conjoined class-9 singulars allow class-10 formal agreement in Xhosa (§2.3, (10)–(12); fn. 40). The plural shape [# Nₓ] is not exceptionless across Bantu: Shona mi lexicalizes bare [N₄] ((89), fn. 42), which is how Shona double plurals like ma-mi-sha arise (§4.3).

      Xhosa singular class-prefix entries: each lexicalizes a bare classifier [Nₓ]. See the table in the section docstring for per-entry sources.

      Equations
      • One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
      Instances For

        Xhosa plural class-prefix entries: each lexicalizes [# Nₓ]. Genders A, D, E share their N with the singular; B and C contain distinct Ns (N₄ ≠ N₃, N₆ ≠ N₅) — the §2 conjoined-agreement finding.

        Equations
        • One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
        Instances For

          The Changana/Rhonga lexicon #

          The stacking languages ((76)–(80), pp. 1365–1366). Here the plural-specific classifiers N₄, N₆, N₁₀ are distinct from every singular's N, and — unlike in Xhosa — may not be first-merged with the root, so pluralization of classes 3, 5, 9 must stack ((62), p. 1361). Entries by gender pair:

          gendersgtreesourcepltreesource
          A (1/2)mu[N₁](79a)va[# N₁](79b)
          B (3/4)mu[N₃](76a)mi[# N₄](77a)
          C (5/6)rhi[N₅](76b), printed ri/rhima[# N₆](77b)
          D (7/8)xi[N₇](80a)swi[# N₇](80b)
          E (9/10)yi[N₉](76c)ti[# N₁₀](77c)

          The five Changana/Rhonga gender pairs, indexed like Xhosa's A–E (no Tsonga Fragment exists yet, so the index is study-local).

          Instances For
            @[implicit_reducible]
            Equations
            Equations
            • One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
            Instances For

              Changana/Rhonga singular class-prefix entries ((76), (79a), (80a)).

              Equations
              • One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
              Instances For

                Changana/Rhonga plural class-prefix entries ((77), (79b), (80b)).

                Equations
                • One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
                Instances For

                  The five Changana/Rhonga genders.

                  Equations
                  • One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
                  Instances For

                    Spellout sanity checks #

                    [N₁] spells out as m: the singular entry wins over ba ↔ [# N₁] (which also contains [N₁]) by the Elsewhere Condition — smallest match.

                    No Xhosa entry lexicalizes a bare N₂ — class 2 has no singular form.

                    Shared vs distinct classifier Ns #

                    The conjoined-subject diagnostic (§2.2–2.7): a conjunction of two class-X singulars triggers matching plural class-Y agreement iff Y's prefix contains the same N as X's prefix.

                    Whether a singular and a plural prefix entry contain the same classifier N — the N at the foot of each stored tree.

                    Equations
                    Instances For

                      Gender A (1/2): m and ba share N₁ ((48)) — conjoined class-1 singulars take class-2 agreement.

                      Gender E (9/10): shared N₉ — conjoined class-9 singulars allow class-10 formal agreement in Xhosa (§2.3, (10)–(12); fn. 40).

                      Gender B (3/4): mi contains N₄, distinct from the N₃ in singular m (§2.6, (18)–(19)) — no matching agreement from conjoined class-3 singulars.

                      Gender C (5/6): ma contains N₆, distinct from N₅ (§2.5, (16)–(17)).

                      Foot Condition: why distinct-N plurals cannot spell out #

                      Rhonga mi ↔ [# N₄] cannot spell out [# N₃]: its foot N₄ is absent from the target (the Foot Condition).

                      No Rhonga entry spells out [# N₃] — the lexicalization failure that forces backtracking and stacking ((70)–(75), p. 1364).

                      Pluralization: direct spellout vs stacking #

                      Result of pluralizing a Bantu noun (§4.2): direct — one plural prefix forms the sole Specifier; stacked — the plural prefix stacks on top of the singular prefix ((75)).

                      Instances For
                        Equations
                        • One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
                        Instances For

                          Derive a plural form by cyclic spellout with last-resort backtracking (§4.2, (70)–(75)):

                          1. The plural structure [# N_baseN] is built, where baseN is the classifier merged with the root at the first step. Which classifier that is, is the cross-linguistic parameter ((82)–(83), p. 1366): Xhosa may (and prefers to) first-merge the plural entry's N (derivePluralFirstMerge); Changana/Rhonga must use the singular's N.
                          2. If some entry spells out [# N_baseN], the derivation is direct.
                          3. Otherwise backtracking builds a second Specifier [# N_plN] inside the first, spelled out on top of the singular prefix [N_baseN] — stacked. By construction the outer prefix always lexicalizes a # -containing target, deriving §4.5's observation that singular prefixes never stack on top of plural ones.

                          Which [# N_W] entry the backtrack targets (plN) is not derived by the spellout calculus: the paper attributes prefix–noun pairing to semantic compatibility with the silent N or to idiom listing (§5.3, §5.5), so plN is a parameter here.

                          Equations
                          • One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
                          Instances For

                            The first-merge option ((82)–(83), p. 1366): the plural entry's N merges with the root directly, so the built structure and the backtrack target coincide. Xhosa takes this option in preference to stacking; the Tsonga languages cannot.

                            Equations
                            Instances For

                              Changana/Rhonga gender B: class 3 nouns stack — mi-mu-twa 'thorns' ((62a), [Bac06]).

                              Rhonga gender C: class 5 nouns stack — ma-rhi-tu 'words' ((62b)).

                              Rhonga gender E: class 9 nouns stack — ti-yi-n-dlu 'houses' ((62c)).

                              Rhonga gender A pluralizes directly: va ↔ [# N₁] shares N₁.

                              Rhonga gender D pluralizes directly: swi ↔ [# N₇] shares N₇.

                              Xhosa first-merges the plural N, so even the distinct-N gender B pluralizes directly: the plural of a class-3 noun is built on N₄ from the start and mi spells it out — no stacking.

                              Xhosa gender C: direct ma, same first-merge route.

                              The cross-linguistic contrast in one statement: the same gender (3/4), direct in Xhosa, stacked in Changana/Rhonga — the paper's central prediction ((82)–(83) vs (62)).

                              Stacking iff distinct Ns #

                              The paper's central correlation, derived rather than stipulated: for any lexicon where direct spellout of [# N_baseN] fails exactly when the singular/plural pair has distinct Ns (hDirect), a successful derivation stacks iff the Ns are distinct. Instantiated per gender below with hDirect discharged by decide.

                              With the first-merge option the built structure and the backtrack target coincide, so a failed direct spellout leaves nothing for backtracking to lexicalize either: stacking is underivable. This is the paper's account of why Xhosa never stacks.

                              For every Changana/Rhonga gender, a successful derivation stacks iff the pair's classifier Ns are distinct — §4.5's stacking-agreement correlation as a per-language theorem.

                              Prefix–concord identity #

                              The paper's entries for nominal class prefixes and subject concords are identical: (60)–(61) (p. 1360) repeat the nominal entries (48)–(49) as the SC entries (the SC's gender head G having been dropped). The paper's own exceptions: SC1 is u, not m (fn. 30), and SC6 is a, not ma ((53c)).