Documents " Language Arts & Discipline "

Linguistics

A Manjako Grammar With

Special Reference To The
Nominal Group.
Show full title

Uploaded by Paulo Silas

# 0 ratings · 334 views · 312 pages

Document Information $
A Manjako Grammar
Original Title
A Manjako Grammar With Special Reference to the Nominal Group.

Copyright
Download now !
© © All Rights Reserved

Available Formats
PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

Share this document AMANJAKOGRAMMAR

A MANJAKOGRAMMAR

WITHSPECIALREFERENCE
WITH SPECIAL REFERENCE

TOTHENOMINALGROUP
TO THE NOMINALGROUP

Facebook Twitter

%
Email
Thesis
Thesis
Did you find this document useful?
submittedforthe
for the submitted

degreeof
degree of

Doct
Doctororof
of Philos ophy
Philosophy

oftheUniversityofLondon
of the University-of London

Is this content inappropriate? Report this Document

by.
by

JanKarlik
Jan Karlik

DepartmentofPhoneticsandLinguistios
Department of Phonetics and Linguistics

SchooiofOrientalandAfricanStudies
School Oriental African Studies
of and

1972
1972

Trusted by over 1 million members

Try Scribd FREE for 30 days to access over 125 million

titles without ads or interruptions!

Start Free Trial

Cancel Anytime.

ext cut off in original

Abstract. tract
Abs

Thepurposeofthisthesisistopresentagrammatical
The purpose of this thesis is to present a grammatical
descriptionoftheManjakolanguageofPortugueseGuinea,
description of the Manjako language of Portuguese Guinea,
highlightingtheNominalGroup.
highlighting the Nominal Group.
Chapter1givesabriefgeneralintroductiontotheManjakos,
Chapter 1 gives a brief general introduction to the Manjakos,
theirlanguage,landandculture,andreviewstheresultsof
their language, land and culture, and reviews the results of
previousresearch.Itoutlinesthetheoreticalbasisofthe
previous research. It outlines the-theoretical basis of the
descriptionandgivesasummaryoftheprincipaltextsusedfor
description and gives a summary of the principal texts used for
thepurposeofanalysis.
the purpose of analysis.
Chapter2brieflyoutlinesthephonologyofManjakoandthe
Chapter 2 briefly outlines the phonology of Manjako and the
orthogr aphyus
orthography ed.
used.
Chapter3
Chapter 3 isdevote
is devoted dtotheN ominalGr
to the Nominal, oup,itsS
Group, tructureaand
its Structure nd
Function.
Function.
Chapters4,5,and6describetheSentenceandString,the
Chapters 4,5, and 6 describe the Sentence and String, the
Clause,andtheVerbalandAdverbialGroupsrespectively,thus
Clause, and the Verbal and Adverbial Groups respectively, thus
providingabackgroundtothefunctionoftheNominalGroup,
providing a background, to the function of the Nominal Group.
Chapter7dealswiththeUnitsataSub-ranktotheNominal
Chapter 7 deals with the Units at a Sub-rank to the Nominal
Group,theNumeralPhraseandtheDemonstrativePhrase.
Group, the Numeral Phrase and the Demonstrative Phrase. -
Chapters8,9,and10examinetheconstituentsoftheNominal
Chapters 8,9, and 10 examine the constituents of the Nominal. 7..
Group(andofotherUnite)attheWordRank,theStemSub-rank,
Group and of other Units) at the Word Rank, the-Stem-Sub-rank,
andtheMorphemeRankrespectively.
and the Morpheme Rank respectively.
Thetextsmostfrequentlydrawnuponforillustrationare
The texts most frequently drawnýupon for, illustration are,
includedintheAppendixinfull.Certaintextwhichhave
included in the Appendix inýfull. Certain texts which, have,
beenfoundmarginallyusefulforreferenceareinoludedin
been found marginally-useful for reference are included in
anabridgedform.
an abridged form.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS.

I wish to express my thanks to many members of the staff of the

Department oX Phonetics and Linguistics at the School of Oriental

and African Studies, University of London, for their instruction

in classes and inspiration outside classes. In particular I wish
to acknowledge my gratitude to my, supervisor, Mr. J. Kelly, for
his advice and constructive criticism.
For my initial training in linguistics I am indebted to the Summer
Institute of Linguistics, both the Australian and the British bran-

ches. My training at the School of Oriental and African Studies was

made possible by a Governing Body Award, and subsequent research in
Dakar, Senegal, in March and April 3.971 was facilitated by a grant
from the Central Research Fund of the University of London. I am
grateful to Dr. C. Day and Mr. A. Shaw of the University College
Computer Centre for preparing programmes for the retrieval of in-
formation from the textsp and to M. Galpin of the University of
Dakar for his help in laboratory work undertaken on the sounds of
Manjako.
I owe much to many Manjako friends who have helped me to learn
their languagel especially to Ouep Mendy who has been my informant
and companion over much of the last seven years.
Much of the thesis has been typed by Mrs. K. Sparks whom I wish
to thank for her cheerfulness and efficiency. I am grateful also
to Eversheds Ltd. of St.
Albans who arranged for the photo-copying.
The thesis has been completed through the help of

my wife who has spent long hours proof-reading, checking and

correcting. I am indebted to her for many suggestions and ideas,
incorporated within the thesis and throughout she has played the

part of a gentle nagging conscience . Together we give thanks to

Almighty God for the strength He has granted,

CONTENTS

A detailed list of contents is included at the beginning of each chaptei

ZýM:

Chapter 1 Introduction 6

1.1 Background 8
1.2 The basis of the present description ý6

hapter 2 Phonology and Orthograph y 30

2.1 A Phonological Outline
31
2.2 Orthogr9phy 41

Chapter 3 The Nominal Grou 43

3-1 Struoture 45
3.2 Function 57
3.3 Nominal Concord 59
3.4 The Nominal Group. Complex 62

Chapter 4 The Sentence 66

4-1 Structure 68
4-ý Function 80
4.3 The String 85

Chater 5 The Clause 88

5.1 Structure 95
5.2 Hood and Theme 106
5.3 Transitivity 123
5-4 Punction 147

Chapter 6 The Verbal and Adverbial Groups 154

6.1 Verbal Group 155
6.2 Adverbial Group 177

Chapter 7 The Phrases

7.1 The Numeral Phrase

7.2 The Digit Phrase
7-3 Concord

7-4 The Demonstrative Phrase

Chapter 8 The Words

8.1 The Verbs

8.2 The Nominals

8-3 The Quasi-nominals

8-4 The Particles

Chapter 9 The Stem

9.1 Structure
9.2 Function

Chapter 10 The Morphemes

10.1 The Roots

10.2 The Derivational Affixes

10.3 The Pronoun Suffixes

10.4 The Inflexional Affixes

Conclusion

The Texts

Bibliograplxy

CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION

ontents page i

Map 7
Background 8
The Manjakos and their language 8

2 The Manjako land and culture 10

3 Previous Reseaxch 13

1.2 s The basis of the present desoription 16

1 Theoretical basis 16

2 The Texts 24

3 The Manjako Story 28

CASAMANCE

Key: Ceograýhical names, e. g. CHULAME

jfain Chieftaincies; e. g. Balckis
Tribes, BALACH
LtO . other e. g.

BABOIANA
ACHUKI Jr

00,
o

3A 130LEBA L-A CH

Balundo

Babok KA

-,,2Ag ýUJSDSE

A7

-Bayo4,
--,

ESSAU

7
16

1(1)

CHAPTER 1. SECTION 1. Backgrýund

1.1. :1 The ManjakoE and their language

The Manjako language is spoken by about 115,000 Manjakos, the

greater number of whom are resident in North-we'st Portuguese

Guinea between the lower reaches of the rivers Cacheu and

Mansoa (also called Geba).

The language is spoken in several dialects. The most prestigious,

and the one spoken by the largest number of Manjakosq is uBok,

called Baboque by the Portuguese. This dialect is spoken in and

around the administrative oentre of the land of the Manjakos, a
township which is called Teixeira Pinto by the Portuguese and
KanchungO by the Manjakos themselves. Other principal dialects
are those spoken around the principal ohieftaincies: Bassarel
(dialect spoken: uXaam)p Churo (uChur), Pelundo (uLund),
Calequisse (uLekis)p Cajinjassa (ujinjasa), Canhobe, (uNh6p)
Beniche (uNich), Cai6 (u.Y8), Jets, (uTer), Pecixe (uLil),
Biangga (u.Yangga), Bara. (uRa), Capual (uPuel). The speakers of
these lesser dialects maintain that they are able to understand
the Baboque dialect without difficulty, as well as the dialects spoken
in surrounding areasq but they find it difficult to communicate with

members of more distant dialectal groupsv especially if those areas

are relatively isolated. So for example uLill a dialect spoken on

the island of Pecixeo although understood by the speakers of other
dialects from neighbouring areaso is not understood by the speakers

of dialects from more distant areasq such as Churo.

In spite of these dialectal differences and political organization
based on local (29 in number) rather than on some,
chieftaincies
central authority, the Manjakos are well aware of their common
tribal membership, and apparently have been for some time, for the

name 'Uanjacollwas known as a supra-dialectal name as early as the

middle of the last century. Bertrand Bocand4 writes'in the Bulletin_

de la SociA4 do G6ographie de Paris, 3e s4rieq XII (1849) in an

1(1)

axticle entitleh De la langue de la Guin6 Portugaisell: On les

appelle Manjacosq parce-que dans la conversation tenue dans la

langue de leur pays, ils r4p4tent souventle mot Manjaco, qui
signifie: Idites donc, ' ou: 'je vous dis. 111S. W. Koelle quotes the
name Mands&ko in his Polyglotta
0 Search
Africans, (1854), in the introductions

although in his Word List he uses the names Saxar and Kanyop (I. B. 2
and I. B-4).
According to Fernando Rogado Quintinho ( Os Povos da Guin6 : Boletim
Cultural da Guin6 Portugues 24 (1969)9 861) the use of the name

Download
Manjaco

us the
information
now goes back to
that
the 18th

earlier
Century.

the Manjakos
The same author

were considered
also gives
to be
!
a single tribe together with the Papels and the Mancanhas, to whom
a collective name Buramos was given. The name Br9me is still used
as an alternative name for the Mancanhas.
According to Koellets classification, the Manjako language is one of
the North-West Atlantic Group of languages. The affinity of Manjako
with two other languages
of that Sub-group is indubitablet the
similarity between the languages Manjakop Papel
and Mancanha may
be clearly shown by lexical comparison of these languages. What is
not so clear is the relationship of these three languages with other
languages of the North-West Atlantic Group. When we study Koelle's
word lists, we observe little lexical similarity between group IB
made up of the languages Bola (so. Mancanha), Sarar (Manjako), Pepel
(Papel), Kanyop (Manjako) on one hand, and Groups IA, IC and ID on the
other. It really seems as if Koelle was influenced by geographical
considerations when he compiled the North-West Atlantic Group because,
again comparing his Word Lists, we may establish a more definite lexical
affinity of his Group IB with the 0 Group of his Group Kongo Ngola
languages (Group X), or even South-Eastern Languages (Group XI) than

with the other Sub-groups of Group I. Of course, with no adequate

linguistic evidence available to form a basis
re-classification, for the
successive generations of comparativists were doubtless influenced by
Koelle's classification. Thus Migeot (1913; 34) gives the grouping

Trusted by over 1 million members

Try Scribd FREE for 30 days to access over 125 million

titles without ads or interruptions!

Start Free Trial

Cancel Anytime.

.1 (1)
Pepel, Bola,
Kanyo'p, which use 6+17 Sararl,
... ý
and Westermann and Bryan (195f; '15) place Manjako among the West
Atlantic Languages, in which Group are also e. g. Fulani, Serer and
Wolof. Greenberg (1955; 10) repeats Koellets Sub-group IB with
slight change ( Bolaaa, Sarar, Pepel, Kanyop ) and leaves it grouped

as Koelle had grouped it, naming this larger Gioup, the West Atlantic
Sub-family of the Ni ger-Congo family But with the present
revival of interest in this small group of languages on the extreme
West coast of Africa, I am confident
affinity of that the linguistic
Manjako will be re-defined and Manjako (together with Papel and Mancanha)
will be added- to some group with which it is more linguistically com-
patible than with its present immediate neighbours.

2 The Manjako land and cultur e-

The land which the Manjakos inhabit is flat, watered by numerous
tidal creeks and rivulets, surrounded in'their estuaries by extensive

mangrove swamps which when reclaimed serve as excellent rice fields.

The dry land, just

above sea-level, a few'feet is fertile and where
,
not cultivated over-groymwith is
vegetation: grass, scrub or jungle.
The Manjakos build their clay huts near their rice-fields or ground-nut
plantations. Their settlements are small, usually consisting of one
compound with three circular straw-covered buildings: the ments house,
the woments house, and the kitchen-shelter. Around Cai6I instead of
separate buildings2 there are long huts divided into sections. On the
island of ýeta, these enclose a square courtyard to which access is
gained through an elaborate'gateway.
Only in densely forested areas axe there ever several hoiiseholds
living together in one settlement,
may consist and then the village
of perhaps a dozen compounds loosely scattered. Marriage is virilocal
and Dolyeynous, so the household may consist of a man and his wife or
wives, his unmarried children, and his married sons together with their
vives and children (but not,
of course, married daughters, unless divorced).
However Greenberg ý1963; P-8 mentions I'Mandyak deleting Sarar and
Kanyop. Homburger ý1957; 54ý remarks: I'Dans les lles on signale...
le papel, le brame ou mancania, le
manjoco, etc. same as in the
earlier edition of 1941.
10

1 (1)

It is usual that after several years of marriage, the married sons

establish their own compounds not far away, where they settle with
their wives and children. While they live-together with the father

and his wives in one household, they are under the father's authorityp
and this continues to some extent until the father's deathp because,
they usually continue in economic co-operation. A man's younger
brother is his heir, with the younger sister's son as next in

succession. The two factors, virilocal marriage and inheritance

by the younger brother, combine to reinforce the unity of the group .
of brothers. Marriage is not permissible between collaterals
reckoning their relationship within four generations.
What towns there are, have been established by the Portuguese: Cacheu
(the first capital of Portuguese Guinea), Teixeira Pinto, the present

administrative centre, Cai6, Calequisse and Pelundo. The population

of each may be counted in hundreds, consisting mainly of Portuguese

or Middle Eastern-busineaB people, Afýrican tradesmen, and lesser
administrative officials. The Mmjakos who.. ind employment in'the towna

settle on the outskirts, as they prefer to continue with their farming

as well, and they do not mingle much with the rest of the African-
population of the townships, who are mostly Mandingo, Fula, or
de-tribalized Creole speakers immigrated, fýrom other tribal areas. . All
these townships axe within twenty miles of Teixeira Pinto, accessible
normally by all-weather roads, but of late only by river-transport or
*air owing to guerilla activity.
The Manjakos are skilled farmers. With a wooden plough as their only
tool they grow a good yearly crop of rice for their staple diet as well
as ground-nuts, sorghum, millet, maize, sweet-poiatoes and cassava.
With a matchet they do the clearing and when no farming is to be done,
they Go to the jungle to get the few remaining necessities of lifes -
palm-nuts the extraction for
of oil, palm-branches for roPe-making and
fencing, and palm-wine for libations to the, ancestral spirits or to use
as a part-payment of the bridal price. Such cash as is needed comes'

).

1(1)

mainly from the sale of ground-nuts and palm-nuts.

Most areas are conveniently situated to fishing sites. Deep sea
fishing is the prerogative of a few professional fishermen who daily
supply the markets with many different kinds of fish. ''River fishing,

on the other hand, is the spare time pursuit of many Manjakos and is
practised in various ways: damming tidal rivulets, building fish-traPs)

catching the fish in circular netsq' or even by line-fishing. This

helps to supplement their diet for, of their livestockj chickens I goats'
and pigs are seldom, and cows never, killed except on ceremonial and
ritual occasions.
The Manjakos are, however, cosmopolitan in their outlook. It is

considered a part of a young man's education to go to the Casamance

region of Senegal or to The Gambia for at least a year to do share-

farming there before getting married. According to a census taken by
Antonio Carreira
on behalf of the administration of Portuguese Guinea
in 1960, approxim tely Vo of the total Manjako population leave their
homes every year to seek employment elsewhere. They stay abroad for

one or two rainy seasonal returning at the end of the harvestq about
Decemberv to pay their own and their families' poll-tax in Teixeira
Pinto. In recentyears more and more of these young men and even women
settle permanently in the Casamanoe or in the Gambia, where Manjako
minorities now run in tens of thousands.
This of course tends to obliterate what differences in dialect or
parochialism in outlook there may have been between the various
dialect speakers. The Baboque dialect
is becoming more prestigious
and is coming to be regarded as pure Manjakoll (manjako mignx).
NMost Manjakos follow their traditional Vaxious trees or
religion.
groves are believed to be visited by demon's to whom petiti'Onersýbring
their requests and blood sacrifices of cows, pigsv goats and chickens.
Libations are offered at the ancestral pegs in each compound. Only a
small number of Manjakos axe Christians or Mohammedans.

12

1 (1)

The percentage of illiterates iý high, although perhaps not as high

as the estimated average for Portuguese Guinea which was put at 9wo by

a government official. Most of the Manjakos emigrating make strenuous

and disciplined efforts to acquire the art of reading and many are
fluent readers of French or English. It is especially among these that
the first productions of Scripture portions and of Manjako Reading books.
have found wide acceptance. The books published so far are: Gospel o
Mark (duplicated edition), Parables of the Lord (Scripture Gift Mission),
Manjako Fables, Readers I, II, III, Christmas Story, ' Easter Sto Gospel of
Joln 1-3, a book of writing aids Let us Write, and'a revised translation of
the Gospel of Mark to be published by the British and Foreign Bible Society:

1.1 : Previous Research

Although the name Mands6koes appears in Koelle's Polvf--lotta Africana

(1854), in his Comparative Vocabulary he gives lexical items which are
doubtless Manjako words under two different headings: I. B. 2 Sarar and
I. B-4 Kanyop. The first one is a dialect spoken in the area of
Bassarel, the second one in the area of Canhobe. The Manjako names for
these two areas are still the same as in Koelle's. time.

It seems that nearly a century elapsed before the name Manjako was again
in linguistic (*). In 1947 a joint
mentioned writing work by Ant6nio
barreira
and Jo5o Basso Marques was published as Monograph No. 3 by the
Centro de Estudos da Guin4 Portuguesa under the name Subs:rdios para o
estudo da 1: npua manjacall. The work abounds in mistakes, often quite
unnecessary ones such as could have been cleared up by asking the informant
a second question. So for enwmple, the morphemes of the paradigm my cat
have been wrongly identified as undal + injill instead of undali + inji .
Consequently the rest of the Possesive Pronoun paradigm bears the marks

of the cat, the 2nd person being given as --iu, 3rd person as -iul, while
the coxTect forms are -u and -ul. The Churo dialect of the same
paradigm has been enriched by the accidental a4dition of this , and so
once again the Possessive Pronoun paradigm is faulty. The whole is rather
less than it was intended by the authors io be, namely Helps in the
Study of the Hanjako Language . There axe nevertheless helpful things
11ý
Except for the restatements of Koelle's work, as mentioned above.
13

1 (1)

found in the 100 pages, most of which are filled with vocabularies: nearly
all Noun Classes have been identified and in the Appendix there is a
Vocabulary CII which is a Portuguese-Ilanjako vocabulary of plants
distinguishing the popular and the botanical names in Portuguese.
Reference to it, and to the rest of this work, must be made with caution,
for several phonemes have not been identified, namely /tr/ /g/ /wl /j/

and /i/.

Manjako was compared with other local languages in an article by

Andr4 Wilson on the languages of Portuguese Guinea entitled Uma Volta
lingulatica da Guind (Boletim Cultural da Guing Portuguesa 14 (1959), 569 ff,

The greatest contribution towards the knowledge of Manjako has been made
in recent times by Monsieur J. L. Doneux. His works are:

(i) Llensemble Manjaku: Dialectes ManiBIm, Pepelq Mankarl , which forms

part (pages 15 to 27) of a larger work entitled Les systkes phonologiques

des langues de Casamance (Centre de Linguistique Appliqu&de Dakar; 1967)
Manjako phonology is discussed and compared with the phonology of ýapel

and Mancanha.
(ii) Le Ibmjakup Classes Nominales et Questions sur L'Alternance
Consonantique in a symposium called La classification nominale dans les

lantrues n4gro africaines; (Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique,

Paxis 1967v 262 - 274)- 1 understand that this article, in a revised

form, should appear in the African Language Review sometime in the near
future.

(iii) Essai de reconstruction de la langue *manjaku which is- a study in

,
Comparative Linguistics, is to appear shortly.

(iv) Llapprentissage du f'ranýais par les ouvriers enTrance

manjakus
(CLA, Paris, 1971), which deals with phonological readjustment of
Manjako workers in France.

The analysis of the other two languages in this linguistic sub-group,

Papel and Mancanhal has also been done recentlys

Mxjana Trifkovic analysed the phonology and morphology of the Mancanha,

1 (1)

language in a book, Le Mancagne, 4tude phonologique et morphologique ,

(IFAN, Dakar, 1969). The Papel language has been analysed (in an
unpublished paper, 1964) and reduced to writing by Lily Gaynor, who has
also translated and published'various portions of the Bible in Papel.

15

CHAPTER 1. SECTION 2. The basis of the present description.

.
1.2 :1 Theoretical Basis

This analysis of Manjako draws on concepts long familiar to linguists,

but does not attempt to remain rigidly within the limits of one particýla, -t,
school or model. It uses those techniques of description considered mos-L
in the description of Manjako, af. Martinet (1949; p. 35)t
useful
Linguists should never forget that it is not for a language to meet
the requirements of a descriptive method, but for the method to adapt
itself to the whims of linguistic reality. The greatest inspiration and,
usefulness present description,
for however, has been found in the
this
(1964
work of M. A. K. Halliday and various articles listed in the
i3ibliography), and the linguistic model which has come to be known as
Systemic Grammar .

, The description is written simply and with as little jargon as

possible, using familiar terms from traditional grammar where appropriate
in order to make it useful to-missionaries and others with only limited
training, in linguistics who are likely to find a practical use for the

material presented.

- The analysis concentrates on Syntax and Morphology, that isp grammar jr,
the more restricted sense of the word as it has been used throughout the
tradition of Systemic Grammar, a use upheld recently by Hudson (1971; 6):
In systemic terminologyj grammar is the name of the level of language
which includes syntax and morphology, but it does not include either
phonology an the one hand, nor lexis or semantics on the other .... the

grammatical account must be deep enough to make contact with the

phonology, and both deep and surface enough to make contact with the
lexis. 11 This is the aim throughout this analysis in the description of
the structure and function of each item described. In keeping with this

aim, references are made from time to time to semantic categories,

frequent examples of lexical groupings are given, and a separate short

chapter on Phonology is included.

The description necessarily attempts to cover the whole languaget since

little has previously been written about it, but, the Nominal Group has

1 (2)
1(2)

beenselectedforspecialattention.
been selected for special attention.
Thisispartlybecauseitsinternal
This is partly because its internal
structureandinparticularthesystemofConcordislikelytobeof
struýture and in particular the syptem of
boncord is likely to be of
interesttostudentsofAfricanlanguages,andpartlybecausethe
interest tb-students of African languages, and partly because the
•relationshipsintowhichtheNominalGroupentersintheClauseseemto
into which the Nominal Group enters in the Clause seem to
-relationships
beafruitfulfieldofstudy.Alargesectionofthethesis(Chapter5,
be a fruitful field of study. A large section of the thesis (Chapter 5.
Seation3)isthereforegivenovertothedescriptionoftransitivity
Section 3) is ther; forý given over to the description of transitivity
inNanjakoexaminingtheParticipantRoles(usingthetermasHalliday
in Manjako examining the Participant Roles (using the term as Halliday
does(e.g.1970;146,147))oftheconstituentNominalGroupsinthe
does (e. g. 1970; 146,147)) of the constituent Nominal Groups in the
Clause.Theanalysisisbasedongrammaticallycompleteutterances.
Clause. The analysis is based on grammatically complete utterances.
Utteranceswhicharegrammaticallyincomplete(althoughtheymaybe
Utterances which axe grammatically incomplete (although they may be
contextuallycomplete)arereferredtoonlyoccasionally.Lyone(1969;
contextually complete) are referred to only occasionally. Lyons (1969;
175)saysofsuchutterancesthattheyare"nottobedescribeddirectly
175) says of such utterances that they are not to be described directly
bythegrammarbutbysupplementaryrules(ifsuchrulescanbe
by the grammar but by supplementary rules (if such rules can be
established)whichaccountforthedeletionofcontextually-determined
established) which account for the deletion of contextually-determined
elementsinthesentencesfromwhichtheutterancesofconnected
elements in the sentences from which the utterances of connected
discoursearederived".
discourse axe derived ,

ThefourcategoriesrecognizedbyHalliday.(1961)unit,atructure,
The four categories recognized by Halliday, (1961). unit,. structuret
classandsysten,areusedbutwithmodificationsdescribedbelow,
class and system, are used but with modifications described belowo
sometimesfollowingHalliday'orlaterwork,andsometimesdrawingon
sometimes following Halliday's own later work, and sometimes drawing on
theworkofotherlinguist,especiallythatofK.Pike(1966)andthe
the work of other linguists, especially that of K. Pike (1966) and the
Tagmemicschool,andthatofJ,T,Bendor-Samuel(1963)andthe
Tagmemic school, andthat of J. T. Bendor-Samuel (1963) and the

Syntag
Syntagmatic chool
maticsschool. .Thethreescalesofthe196larticlearealso
The three scales of the 1961 article axe also
incorporated,exponenceanddelicacyimplicitlyandrankexplicitly,
incorporated, ebcponence and delicacy implicitly and rank'explicitly, ''
butwithmodificationa.
but with modifications.

ConsiderableusehasbeenmadeofHalliday'conceptof"components",
Considerable use has beexi'made of Halliday's concept of components ,
(e.g.1969;85).Herecognizesespeciallytheinterpersonal,ideational
(e. g. -1969; 85). He recognizes especially the interpersonalq ideational
andintra-textualcomponents,providingmajor"areasofsyntacticchoice"
and intra-textual componentsq providing major areas of syntactic choice, ' 30
whichintheEnglishClausehehasidentifiedastransitivity,moodand
which in the English Clause, he has identified as transitivity, mood and
theme.
theme. InthisanalysisofManjako,thetermComponentisweedinan
In this analysis of Manjakop the term Component is used in an
extendedsensetorefertoanumberofareasofsyntacticchoice,not
extended'sense to refer to a number of areas of syntactic choice, not
onlyMoodorTransitivity,butalsoauchareasofgrammarasPolarity
only Mood or Trans'itivityv but*also such areas of gramm as-Polarity
or Te nse.
Tense.,,
or

17

1(2)
1

Unit
Unit

"''Theunitisthestretchofianguagethatcarriesgrammaticalpatterns"
The unit is the stretch of langdage that carries grammatical patterns
(Halliday1964,25)."Foreachlanguagewerecognizeaparticularsetof
(Halliday 196ý, 25). For each language we recognize a particular set of
unitsrangedinfixedorderontherankscale"(ibid.,27),
units ranged in fixed order on the rank scale (3.bid., 27)-

TheUniteidentifiedforthisanalysisofManjakoare!
The Units identified for this analysis of Manjako ares
SENTENCE
SENTENCE
(STRING)(*)
(STRING)
CLAUSE
CLAUSE
GROUP
GROUP
(PHRASE)
(PHRASE)
WORD
WORD
(STERA)
(STEM),
MORPHENE
MORPHEME

Structure
Structure

"Thecat egoryo
The category of fstructu the ecate
structure re a.iissth gorytthat
Category for rthe
ocountsfo
hataaccounts the
variouswaysinwhichanoccurrerceofoneunitmaybemade
various ways in which an'occ=exfoe of one un:L. may be made
upoutofoccurrences'oftheunitnextbelowit
up out of occurrences'of the unit next below it
(Hal
(Halliday 19649 ,28).
liday1964 28).

EachUnit(exoepttheMorpheme)mayconsistofseveralElementsin
Each Unit (except the Morpheme) may consist of several Elements in'
more-or-lessfixed(lineal)order.
more-or-less fixed (lineal) order.

Inthisdescription,unitshavingthesameStructurearegroupedinto
In this description, units having the same Structure axe grouped into
TypeseachofwhichisnumberedbyaRomannumeral.
Types each of which is numbered by a Roman numeral.

AdistinctionismadebetweenSurfaceStructurebywhichismeantthe
A distinction is made between Surface Structure by which is meant the
statusandsequenceoftheElement,andConstituentStructurebywhich
status and sequence of the Elements, and Constituent Structure by which
ismeantthemoredetaileddescriptionofchoicesofmanifestingClasses
is meant the more detailed description of choices of manifesting Classes
fortheElements.Forinstance,thefirstdivisionoftheNominalGroup
for the Elements. For instance, the first division of the Nominal Group
intotheMajororMinorTypesisonthebasisofSurfaceStructure,the
into the Major or. Minor Types is on the basis of Surface Structure, the
criterionbeingwhetherornottheHeadElementispresent.
criterion being whether or not the Head Element is present. TheMajor
The Major
NominalGroupisfurthersub-dividedintosub-typesonthebasisof
Nominal Group is further sub-divided into sub-types on the basis of
ConstituentStructure,dependingonwhichparticularClasse.g.Nounor
Constituent Structure, depending on which particular Class e. g. Noun or
Pronown,manifeststheHeadElement,whichinturninfluencesthe
Pronoun, manifests the Head Elementl which in turn influences the
possibilityofco-occurrenceoftheoptionalElement,ThusSurface
possibility of co-occurrence of the optional Elements. Thus Surface

(*)TheString,PhraseandStemdonothavefullstatusasUnits.
The String, Phrase and Stem do not have full status as Units.
18

1(2)
1 '(2)

StructurerelatestothesyntagmaticaxisandConstituentStructure
Structure relates to the syntagmatic axis and Constituent Structure
relatestotheparadigmaticaxis.Wherethereisnochoiceofdifferent
relates to the paradigmatic axis. Where there is no choice of different
manifestingclasses,ConstituentStructureisnotdescribedseparately
manifesting classes, Constituent Structure is not described separately
fromSu rfaceSt
from Surface ructure. Theterm"constituency"isretainedtoexpress
Structure. The term constituency is retained to express
thetraditionalstructuralistsensewherenecessary,forinstance,to
the traditional structuralist sense where necessary, for instancep to
describethemanifestationofthevariousNominalGroupsincasesof
describe the manifestation of the various Nominal Groups in cases of
embedding.MostoftheUnitsattheWordRankaredescribedashavinga
embedding. Most of the Units at the Word Rank are described as having a
Source Element and a System Element. ThesetermsfollowBolinger'g
SourceElemontandaSystemElement. These terms follow Bolinger's
divisionofmorphemesintoSourcemorphemesandSystemmorphemes(1968;56)
division of morphemes into Source morphemes and System morphemes
(1968; 56),

Hudson(1971;,75)haspointedoutthatsinceSystemicGrammaremphasizea
Hudson (1971;, 75) has pointed out that since Systemic Grammar emphasizerji
classification,itshouldbepossibletodispense.withthedescription
classificationy it should be possible to dispense. with the description.
obligatoryvs.optionalfortheatatusofElement"ifthegrammariB
obligatory vs. optional for the status of Elements if the grammar is
,
fullyexplicit",Thedistinctionisretainedherehowever,firstly
fully explicit . The distinction is retained here however, firstly
becaugethisshortdescriptionofalanguagenotpreviouslydescribedcan
because this short description of a language not previously described can
hardlyaimatbeing"fullyexplicit",andsecondlybecausetheconcept
hardly aim at being fully explicit , and secondly because. the concept
"optional"seematobeaveryusefulone,particularlywithreferenceto
optional seems to be a very useful one, particularly with reference to
theoptionalElementsoftheMajorNominalGroupswithoutit,aprolifera-
the optional Elements of the Major Nominal Groupt without it, a prolifera-
tionofTypeswouldbeneededtoaccountforeverypossibleao-occurrence
tion of Types would be needed to account forlevery possible oo-occurrence
oftheHeadandthesixoptionalElements.
the Head and the six optional Elements.
of

Class
Class
"Aclassisanysetofitemshavingthesamepossibilitiesofoperation
A class is any set of items having the same possibilities of operation
instructure"(Halliday1964;29).
in structure (Halliday 1964; 29).

AllUnitsexceptSentencesfunctionprimarilyasUnitsofahigherRank.
All Units except Sentences function primarily as Units''of a higher Rank.
UnitswhichfunctioninthesamewayaregroupedtogetherintoClasses
Units which function in the sameway axe grouped together into Classes
eachofwhichisnumberedbyanArabicnumeral.
each of which is numbered by an Arabic numeral.
TheClass-and-TypedivisionrepresentadeparturefromtheSystemic
The Class-and-Type division represents a departure from the Systemic
modelofdescription.Itisusedinthe"SyntagmaticModel"developed
model of description. It is used in the Syntagmatic Model developed
fromthetechniquesuaedbyJ.T.Bendor-Samuel(1963)andappliedrecently
from the techniques used by J. T. Bendor-Samuel, (1963) and applied recentl, )p.)
-
toafullgrammaticaldescriptionofalanguage,byElaineThomas(1969).
to a fall gramm ical description of a language. by Elaine Thomas_(1969).
Thedistinctionisadoptedforthisanalyaisbecausethetermsreflect
The distinction is adopted for this analysis because the terms. refleot
thetwocriteriaofclassification,StructureandFunction,appliedto
the two criteria of classification, Structure and Function, applied to
everyUnit(althoughfurthercriteriamaysometimesbeapplied,as
every Unit (although further criteria may sometimes. be applied, as
describedbelow).
described below).
II
19
19

Trusted by over 1 million members

Try Scribd FREE for 30 days to access over 125 million

titles without ads or interruptions!

Start Free Trial

Cancel Anytime.

1(2)
1 (2)

System
Svstem -

Mallidaydescribesasystemas"arepresentationofrelationsonthe
Halliday describes a system as a representation, of relations on the
paradigmaticaxis,asetoffeaturescontrastiveinagivenenvironment'
paradigmatic a. Js, a set of features contrastive in a given environment
(1965;60),andgoesontoshowhowsystemsoffeaturesmayrepresent
(1965; 60), and goes on to show how systems of features may represent
simultaneouschoicesormaybeordered.
simultaneous choices or may be ordered. '

Hallidayenvisagesasystemiodescriptionandastructuraldescription
Halliday envisages a systemic description and a structural description
togethergivingafullgrammaticaldescriptionofeachitem.However,
together giving a full grammatical description of each item. However,
inthisanalysis,theconceptofsystemhasnotbeenusedthroughout,
in this analysis, the concept of'system has not been used throughout,
ci,Halliday(1965;61):"Itmaybeuseful...toconsiderthenotion
cf. Halliday
(1965; 61): It may be useful to consider the notion
...
ofalsygtemicdescription'asoneformofrepresentationofalinguistic
of a 'systemic descriptiont as one form of reptesentation of a linguistic
item,theassumptionbeingthatitcomplementsbutdoesnotreplaceits
item, the assumption being that it complements but does not replace its
structuraldescription".Asystemicdescriptionhasbeenfound
structural description . A systemic description has been found
particularlyusefulinthecaseofsimultaneousgub-divisions,Hudson
particularly useful in the case of simultaneous sub-divisions, Hudson
(1971;56seesthisasaspecialcontributionofSystemicGrammar:
(1971; 56) sees this as a
special contribution of Systemic Grammar:
Wheneverwesetupagrammaticalclasswedosobysub-dividingsome
'Whenever vie set up a grammatical class we do so by sub-dividing some
largerclasswithrespecttosomedimension'ofclassification
larger class with respect to some Idimensiontof classification .....
Thismeansthateachclassiscontrastedwithatleastoneotherclass
This means that each class is contrasted with at least one other class
regultingfromthesamogub-divisionanditisthisrelationofcontrast
resulting from the same sub-division and it is this relation of contrast
betweentheclassescorrespondingtoonedimensionofclassification
between the classes corresponding to one dimension of classification
whichwere fertoasa
which'we refer 'gystem!"
to as alsystem ', ,and(ibid
(ibid. ,55)"agra
55) a mmar...must and grammar ... must
allowcross-classification",The.distinctionusedinthisanalysis
allow cross-classification . The. distinction used in this analysis
betweenTypes('dimension'ofStructure)andClasses('dimension'of
between Types(ldimension' of Structure) and Classes (dimension' of
Function)hasmeantthatfurthercropg-classificationhasnoteverywhere
Function)-has meant that furtber cross-classification has not everywhere
beennecessary,However,wherecross-cuttingsub-divisionsalongother
been necessary. However, where cross-cutting sub-divisions along other
"dimengionsofclassification"havebeenconsidereddesirable,a
dimensions of classification have been considered desixableg a
bystemicdescriptionhasbeengiven,forinstanceinChapter5,wherethe
systemic-description has been given, for instance in Chapter 5, where the
Clausehasbeendescribedintermsofthree"dimensionsofclassification'
Clause has been described in terms of three dimensions of classification ,
MoodandTheme(Section2),Transitivity(Section3),andFunction
Mood and Theme (Section 2), Transitivity (Section 3), and Function
(Section4).
(Section 4)-' Inpracticeasystemicdescriptionhasgenerallyprovedmost
In practice a systemicAescription has generally proved mostl
usefultodescribe.structuralrealizationsoffeaturesofthevarious
useful to describe-stractural realizations of features of the various
Components mentioned above. Differentsystemshavebeendescribedfor
Componentsmentionedabove. Different systems have been described for
UnitsatdifferentRanks,andaComponentissaidtobeprojectedin
Units at different Ranks, and a Component is said to be projected in
Unitswhereitsfeaturesarerealized.ThustheComponentofTransitivity
Units whereits features are realized. Thus the Component of Transitivity
isprojectedintheClauseand,correspondingly,theClauseservesasa
is projected in the Clause and, correspondingly, the Clause serves as a
ProjectionPlanefortheComponentofTransitivity,
Projection Plane for the Component of Transitivity.
-20

1(2)
1 2)

AnattempthasbeenmadeinthisanalyaistobringtogethertheSurface
An attempt has been made in this analysis to bring together the Surface
andDeepGrammarintheidentificationoftheComponents.
and Deep Grammar in the identification of the Components.

TheComponentsidentifiedinthegrammararethefollowing:Theme,
The Components identified in the gramm are the following: Theme,
Transitivity,Mood,Tense,Polarity,SemanticClass,lexicalClass,
Transitivityv Mood, Tense, Polarity, Semantic Class, Lexical Class,
Numbor,PersonandAspect.TheyareprojectedinUniteatvariousRanks,
Numberv Person and Aspect. They are projected in Units at various Ranks,
asshowninthefollowingdiagram:
n the following diagram:
as shown.

Theme•
Theme-ý
Transitivity
Transitivity
Tense
Tense
Hood
Ifood
Polarity
Polarity +B
SemanticClass
Semantic Class
LexicalClass
Lexical Class
Number
Number #t
Person
Person
Aspeot
Aspect

Thesyatemsarediagrammedwithbrackettingfollowingtheestablished
The systems are diagrammed with bracketting following the established
practice.Onlythefollowingneedbementionedi
practice. Only the following need be mentionedi

selectionofeitheraorb
selection of either a or b
b

a selectionofbothaandb
selection of both a and b
b

a0
b
priorselectionofeitheraorbisaconditionfor
prior selection of either a or b is a condition for
theselectiononc
the selection on c

a].
a0
b
priorselectionofbothaandbisaconditionforthe
prior selection of both a and b is a condition for the
selectionofo
of a
selection

Note;lettersmayrepresenteitheraainglefeatureorasystemoffeatures
Note: letters may represent eithe= a single feature or a system of features

Wherefeaturesaredescribed,theremaybeacorrespondencebetween
Where features are describedl there may be a correspondence between-
featureandType,andtheTypeisgiventhesamenameasthefeature
feature and Type and the Type is given the same name as the feature
I
realizedinit.ThusthefeatureperipheralisrealizedinthePeripheral
realized in it. Thus the feature +peripheral is realized in the Peripheral
Clause(ClauseTypeIIab).Systemsoffeaturesarenotdescribedwhereno
Clause Clause Type Mab). Systems of features are not described where no
furthercross-cuttingsub-divisionsarerequiredinadditiontothe
further cross-cutting sub-divisions are required in addition to the

21

1(2)
1 (2)

Structure-Functionclassifications,butdiagramsintheformof
Structure - Function classifications, but diagrams in the form of
networksareoftenincludedtoillustratestructuralpossibilities,
networks are often included to illustrate structural possibilitiest
becausetheseprovideaconvenientmeansofgraphicrepresentation
because these provide a conveni*ent means of graphic representation...,
Renk
Rank

Hallidayoriginallyenvisagedrankasataxonomicscale,withordering
Halliday originally envisaged rank as a taxonomic scale, with ordering
ofunitssuchthateachfunctionsintherankimmediatelyabove:With
of units such that each functions in the rank immediately above: With
increasingemphasisonsystems,ranknolongerhasthesameimportance
increasing emphasis on systems, rank no l6nger hasthe'same importance
Inthesystemicmodel,being"mapped"ontothesyntagmaticandparadigmat
in the systemic model, being mapped onto the syntagmatic and paradigmatý
relations(Hudson1971;69).
relations (Hudson 1971; 69). Thisanalysisadoptsthetagmemicconcept
This analysis adopts the tagmemic concýept
ofrankwhichissomerhatsimilartoHallidey'searliermodel,andante-
of rank which is somewhat similar to Halliday's earlier model, and ante-
datedit.TheRanksarearrangedinahierarchy,eachnamedafterthe
dated it. The Ranks are arranged in a hierarchy, each named after the
UnitoftherespectiveRank,butwiththepossibilityof"level
Unit of the respective Rank, but with the possibility of level--
skippingifthisresultsineconomyofdescription.
skipping if this results in economy of description. Thus,following
Thus, following