“Syntax of object in marking Bantu language”
The Bantu language or Narrow Bantu language is a variety of language from common Niger Congo comprises more or less than 250 languages mixed and unclear but still practiced and spoken in wide regions of Africa. These are interrelated family of languages. There are more than 80 million users of this language across 8 African countries like Zimbabwe, Swahili, and Nigeria among others. But as of today Bantu is recognized as a language group rather than socio cultural. This language is used often by traditional people to facilitate trading during the early African civilization.
Technically Bantu means People since this is a language of mix cultural diversity according to Carl Friedrich Michael meinhof a German linguistic expert who was the first to study this language that it requires further study due to its grammatical structure but they have not found the real genealogical roots of this language because of mix cultural diversity. They are even less successful to classify which or which the languages may fall. In most attempt of the study they have found insufficient data in clustering its importance.
One of the most pronounce and most agreed language in Bantu is morphology this is the easiest and the most detailed in generative comparative syntax object in marking. Evidently this language provides two types of agreement system which is the subject and topic agreement. Or constructively the subject objects agreement. Researchers have found ways to make this agreement will maintain its standard assumption in most basic language.
Considerably many linguistic all over the world have found this language interesting since this is a cultural heritage that is one of a kind and because of its wide variation approach. The object marking and variation can be said to be quite flexible in regard to adaptability and assertions. To give simple marking we may say the wh whereby it is ungrammatical in nature. While in some other Bantu languages this kind of marking modification is not allowed, while some may allow it but requires uncertainty regardless of worlds. And as you can see considerably the kind of markings can be used as marking but not as effective types of indicator properties of object syntax. To demonstrate the differences wh from Sambaa, Swahili and Haya Bantu are affected by linguistic features of noun rather than syntax across languages.
While Swahili has been the most popular among Bantu languages object marking is still considerably required to identify object relation. In other arguments Sambaa has also shown language agreement and marking is obligatory for using proper names. While in Haya object marking is grammatical although optional. In other words Sambaa and Swahili are obliged to use marker while Haya is not. Using who in Swahili an in Sambaa is obligatory while in Haya is ungrammatical. Therefore the following classification has been concluded to simplify the syntax of object in marking Bantu language.
Languages Object Marking for ‘who’ Object marking for ‘what’/‘which’
Swahili Obligatory Grammatical
Sambaa Obligatory Ungrammatical
Haya Ungrammatical Ungrammatical
This are just a few simplification of syntax of object marking in Bantu languages and there are lots and more ways to identify the different object marking in this language but it require a further analysis since there are a lot to discuss here and you may need to consult a complete translator or dictionary guide to be able to classify comprehensively such differences among other languages in Bantu languages. Hopefully the table will help you classify more of its specific general example object marking of the three languages using the following data. (Animate means to make a subject or object active and inanimate means to make the object inactive)
Language
Obligatory Marking
Object Marking for humans
Object Marking for Animates
Object Marking for Inanimates
Swahili
Sambaa
Hayaa
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Generally we can say that the focus of Bantu syntax object marking belongs to human classification and all three languages patterned likeness or differ for animates and inamimates however the exact or definite markings cannot be over analyzed, this is simply because the specific object does not require markings or depending on the languages spoken among the different languages. And more so they differ in morphosyntax in several ways and the syntax alternative is still cannot be understand. Therefore cross linguistically speaking properties of object marking should be shared almost always from all forms of Bantu languages or if not, make it even more complicated.
Credit:ivythesis.typepad.com
0 comments:
Post a Comment