Object marking in Kihehe
| dc.contributor.author | Msamba, Enitha M. | |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2020-03-13T10:03:45Z | |
| dc.date.available | 2020-03-13T10:03:45Z | |
| dc.date.issued | 2013 | |
| dc.description | Available in print form, University of Dar es Salaam at Dr. Wilbert Chagula Library(THS EAF PL8025T34M7352) | en_US |
| dc.description.abstract | This study is a descriptive analysis of object marking in Kihehe (henceforth OM). The study specifically focused on morphological morphemes that can occupy the object position, explaining the behaviour of the post-verbal NPs in relation to OM and the role of discourse in Kihehe object marking. Primary data were collected using elicitation method, which was through a focused group discussion and questionnaire. Secondary data was extracted from written sources and recorded conversation.The findings revealed that object marking in Kihehe is restricted to only one NP (indirect object) for ditransitive sentences and direct object in mono-transitive sentences. Morphological morphemes that may occupy the OM position include noun class affixes, locative affixes, personal pronouns affixes, reflexive and reciprocal. Using morpho-syntactic test of object marking, passivization and word order to analyze the status of post-verbal NPs in ditransitive constructions, the results were contradictory. It was found that object marking in Kihehe is restricted to only one object. The word order of the post-verbal NPs in relation to the verb is free. With regard to the passivization, Kihehe has both symmetrical and asymmetrical passive in applicative sentences while in natural ditransitive verb and causative verb only indirect object can be passivized. In the light of that, the notion of indirect object in Kihehe should be revised. Discourse features such as specificity, person and definiteness are essential in Kihehe OM. In addition, an object marker in Kihehe can function as both pronominal and agreement marker. Although the study cannot claim to have solved all the mysteries in relation to object marking in Kihehe, it has laid the foundation for further investigation on this syntactic phenomenon. An appropriate Binding Theory should be developed to capture the binding domain of reflexive in Kihehe. A detailed analysis is also required on the reciprocal and reflexive in Kihehe. Further research is also required on the conditions that determine the pronominal and agreement functions of Kihehe OM. | en_US |
| dc.identifier.citation | Msamba, E. M (2013).Object marking in Kihehe, Master dissertation, University of Dr es Salaam, Dar es Salaam | en_US |
| dc.identifier.uri | http://41.86.178.5:8080/xmlui/handle/123456789/7753 | |
| dc.language.iso | en | en_US |
| dc.publisher | University of Dar es Salaam | en_US |
| dc.subject | Hehe language | en_US |
| dc.subject | Bantu languages | en_US |
| dc.subject | Languages | en_US |
| dc.subject | Tanzania | en_US |
| dc.title | Object marking in Kihehe | en_US |
| dc.type | Thesis | en_US |