Notes on Mubi syntax

Looking over Jungraithmayr's Mubi grammar again recently, I think I managed to make sense of the subject paradigms. Presumably all this was clear to Jungraithmayr, but it certainly wasn't clear to me, nor was it mapped to cross-linguistic typological categories; it may therefore be useful to comment.

At first sight, Mubi looks like its basic order is SVOX, as in sentences like:

màb-í	nyúbùt	rúm-jí	á	sìrèebí-jí
grandmother-1SgGen	carry_on_back.PFV	daughter-3FSgGen	LOC	rib-3FSgGen
My grandmother carries her daughter on her side. (Jungraithmayr 2013:153)

However, the reality is a little more complicated. Basically: Mubi syntax has what I suppose is a focus slot immediately before the verb, which can be filled by a noun phrase or by a short pronoun ("pronom personnel sujet préposé"). The syntactic role of an element in this slot is determined not by its position alone, but crucially also by what immediately follows the verb stem:

• If the verb has no pronominal suffixes, the preverbal element is the subject.
• If the verb has a pronominal suffix, the preverbal element is the object, whose interpretation depends on the subject suffix series:
  • J's "série I" puts the verb into object voice (cf. Remijsen on Shilluk) - that is, it promotes the direct object to this position;
  • J's "série II" puts the verb into benefactive voice - that is, it promotes the indirect object to this position;
  • J's "série III" puts the verb into applicative voice - that is, it promotes what would otherwise have been the object of a preposition (typically tí "with") to this position.

In relative clauses too, the head is treated as if it filled the preverbal slot (and, indeed, does precede the verb of the relative clause).

When arguments are not promoted, they remain postverbal; there are two distinct suffixed object pronoun series for direct and indirect objects respectively.

It is possible to have a ditransitive sentence with both objects postverbal, e.g.:

báar-á	tògò	gì	ʔjúrúk	à	sùltân
give.PFV-3MSg.0[!]	skin	Gen.M	leopard	to	Sultan
He gave the skin of the leopard to the sultan ("er gab der Fell des Leoparden dem Sultan" - Lukas 1937:177)

dì	lìî	kòrré	à	lòk
3FSg	make.PFV	beer	to	women
She made millet beer for the women. (Jungraithmayr 2013:143)

However, Jungraithmayr gives plenty of examples where one or the other is preverbal, in which case the appropriate subject pronoun series is used:

ká	háráɗí-ndé	sèerí
2MSg	tie-1Sg.II	rope
I tied the rope for you. (Jungraithmayr 2013:44)

ár	lúk	ngér-gu-dó
3MSg	woman	find.PFV-3MSg.I-1SgDat
He found a woman for me. (Jungraithmayr 2013:43)

It is also possible to use these series without any overt preverbal element, e.g.

íwín-gu	mà	cíi-gú,	ɓée-gút	á	gùrá-t
tie.PFV-3MSg.I	and	take.PFV-3MSg.I,	go-3MSg.II	to	bush-3MSg.Gen
He tied him and took him, went with him [brought him] into the bush. (Jungraithmayr 2013:43)

It looks like cases like this can most easily be interpreted elliptically, as featuring a null preverbal "pronoun".

So here we have a system that gives SVO if the verb lacks subject agreement, but SOV (one way or another) whenever it does have agreement. This is curiously reminiscent of West Nilotic. Anywaa is kind of the inverse: you get OVS if the verb lacks subject agreement, but SOV if it has it. The choice among subject agreement series is functionally very similar to what we see in Shilluk, where the preverbal argument is interpreted as a subject if the verb is in subject voice, an object if the verb is in object voice, and an instrument if the verb is in applicative voice, while all other arguments follow the verb. But Shilluk differs in that, unless the verb is in subject voice, the subject is marked by a preposition.

For completeness, here are (most of) the forms, somewhat simplified:

	free	short	I = object voice	II = benefactive voice	III = applicative voice	DO	IO	Poss
1sg	ndé	ní	-nà	-ndé	-én	-din	-dó	-̀í
2msg	kám	ká	-ká	-kát	-kát	-d(og)a	-(d)(ìg)á	-̀dá
2fsg	kín	kí	-ké	-két	-két	-dige	-(d)ìgé	-̀jí
3msg	ár	à	-kū	-kút	-kūt	-dar / -é	-(d)ìgí	- V́t
3fsg	tír	dì	-kī	-kít	-kīt	-dir	-(d)ìgí	-́jí
1exc	éné	á	-(á)nē	-nét	-ànēt	-dìné	-dìné	-́jìné
1inc	áná	á	-(á)nā	-nát	-ànāt	-dá	-dá	-́já
2pl	kéné	ká	-kún	-kún	-kún	-dùgún	-dùgún	-̀júgún
3pl	kér	kà	-kō	-kót	-kōt	-dugur / -á	-dùgó, -dógór	-́jó

We may notice that the benefactive and applicative are nearly the same, but with traces of an extra vocalic element preceding the agreement in the applicative; both show obvious traces of what must once have been a stranded preposition tí "with" at the end. Both the DO and IO series appear to show the same element before the pronominal marker rather than after it, oddly reminiscent of Hebrew ʔɛṯ. All three voice series show a curious -k- preceding the 3rd person forms.