Instruction: Akamuteera

Response: This sentence is also arrived at after different transformational rules, for instance the "flip - flop" rule which transfers the pronoun object mu mu from the final position to the position immediately before the verb. The examples given above have illustrated the basic components in a sentence, which may not always be the same. The following Runyoro-Rutooro sentences all comprise basic elements: [1] Omwana akaija. [2] Omwana akabyama. [3] Omwana akateera embuzi. [4] Omwana akajima abakazi. [5] Omwana akaruga omu musiri. The child came. The child slept. The child beat the goat. The child insulted the women. The child came from the garden. [6] Omwana akazaanira omu musiri. [7] Omwana yali murungi. [8] Omwana yali mudoma. [9] Omwana yali mu musiri. [10] Omwana yali ha nju. [11] Omwana akata omwigo mu nju. [12] Omwana akarabya ente mu muhanda. [13] Omwana akaha omwojo oburo. [14] Omwana akagurra nyina orugoye. The child played in the garden. The child was good. The child was stupid. The child was in the garden. The child was at the house. The child put the walking stick in the house. The child made the cows go through the path. The child gave millet to the boy. The child bought a cloth for his mother. What is being shown in all the above sentences is that each one of them contains just the basic components. Each one of them cannot be reduced any further without affecting the grammaticality or the basic meaning of the sentence. For instance, in [1] and [2] nothing can be removed. The verbs kwija (to come) and kubyama (to sleep) are usually called intransitive verbs and do not therefore need an object. They are, so to say, self-sufficient. In [3] and [4] the verbs kuteera (to beat) and kujuma (to insult) are transitive and need therefore to be accompanied by an object. If one said: Omwana akateera or omwana akajima (The child beat or he child insulted) one feels that there is something missing. On the other hand, in sentence [5] and [6] no component can be deleted either. The verbs kuruga (to come from) and kuzaanira (to play in) need an object, often known as an indirect object, because such an object is introduced by a preposition. Such verbs are called indirect transitive verbs. This is because a verb like kuruga (to come from) requires an object preceded by a preposition indicating place, in this case (o)mu., likewise, the verb kuzaanira (to play in) is a derived verb and the derivational affix -ir- requires that the object be preceded by a preposition indicating place, that is, (o) mu mu (in). Sentence [7] and [8] contain what is known as copula verbs, in this case the verb kuba'to be' under the li form. This type of verb is necessarily followed by another component to complete it, that can be called a complement. In [7] and [8] this component is an adjective but it can also be a prepositional phrase as in [9] and [10]. In sentences 11 and 12, the verbs in akata "he put, he placed and akarabya (he made something go through somewhere), prepositional phrases are needed, i.e. mu nju (in the house) and mu muhanda (through the path). In sentences 13 and 14 the verbs in akaha (he gave) and akagurra (he bought for) require both a direct and an indirect object, sometimes called primary and secondary objects respectively. In summary, it can be said that, in a simplified manner the basic components which we can also call constituents in a Runyakitara sentence are as follows: [1]


Instruction: NP+V


Instruction: NP+V+NP [3]

Response: NP+V+Adj NP+V+Adj. [4]


Instruction: The modalities of a sentence or sentence modifiers

Response: All sentences fall into several major categories sometimes called modalities. Some of these modalities are mutually exclusive and they are called the primary modalities while others are not mutually exclusive and can either appear with the primary modalities or can cumulate with themselves. The primary modalities of a sentence are: Assertive (or declarative) Interrogative Imperative The secondary modalities are: negative/affirmative passive/active emphatic (including exclamation) The following examples illustrate the above ( Rn/Rt Rn/Rt ): [1] Omukazi naatema emiti. [1] The woman is cutting trees. [2] Omukazi naatema emiti? [2] Is the woman cutting trees? [3] Omukazi ateme emiti! [3] Let the woman cut trees! The above three sentences show that a sentence cannot at the same time be assertive [1], interrogative [2] and imperative [3]. There is therefore mutual exclusiveness between the three modalities. Compare the above with the sentences below ( Rn/Rt Rn/Rt ): [1] Omukazi tarukutema omuti. [1] The woman is not cutting the tree. [2] Omukazi tarukutema omuti? [2] Isn't the woman cutting the tree? [3] Omuti nigutemwa omukazi. [3] The tree is being cut by the woman. [4] Omuti nigutemwa omukazi? [4] Is the tree being cut by the woman? [5] Omuti ogu otagutema! [5] Don't cut that tree! [6] Tarukugutema omukazi omuti. [6] The woman is not cutting the tree. Sentence [1] above shows a combination of assertive and negative modalities. In [2] there are both interrogative and negative modalities. In [3] we have both assertion and passive. In [4] there is passive and interrogation. In [5] we have an imperative sentence which is also negative. In [6] there is assertion, negation and emphasis. Other combinations are also possible as long as the three primary modalities do not combine, for example: Gutatemwa omuti ogu! Let it not be cut, that tree! The above sentence can be said to have the imperative as its primary modality, with passive, negative and emphasis as the secondary modalities.


Instruction: Types of Sentences

Response: In Runyakitara the major types of sentences can be said to be the following: [a] Complete and incomplete sentences. [b] Simple and complex sentences.


Instruction: [a] Complete and incomplete sentences

Response: A sentence is said to be complete when it provides all the basic information needed and fulfils the basic structure. Compare the following sentences in Runyankore-Rukiga: [1] Omwishiki yaagyenda. [2] Omushaija naahiiga omu kibira. [3] Embwa ekaboigorera omu kibuga. [4] Mugyenzi wangye aryagura motoka omuri Kampala. [5] Yaateeka ebyokurya omu nyungu. The girl has left. The man is hunting in the forest. The dog barked in the town. My friend will buy a car in Kampala. She has cooked food in the pot. All the above sentences are complete sentences because they appear to provide all the basic information required. Their structure is also acceptable in Runyakitara language. Sentences [1] and [3] can be said to be basic sentences because they contain only the necessary information as described earlier. Sentences [2], [4] and [5] are complete sentences but they are not basic. For instance, in [2] it is not necessary to know that the man is hunting in the forest (omu kibira). In the same manner, in [5] the information omu nyungu (in the pot) is not essential. Thus, complete sentences may be basic or non-basic. On the other hand, the sentences below in Runyoro-Rutooro cannot be said to be complete. [1] Kwigama enjura mu rufunjo. [2] Ebya ncwera nyaatire kunu. [3] Omukama ayatucungwire. [4] Amalya mabi. [5] Enganikyo otasemerire kufeerwa. Looking for shelter in a swamp. (Literally) Things of 'Give me a piece of millet which I can eat in my corner without sauce' - i.e.: Someone who has no courage to assert himself. The Lord who saved us. Poor eating. The stories that you should not miss. All the above sequences can be considered as sentences in different contexts. For instance, No. [1] is a saying, relating to someone who looks for help where help cannot be got. No. [2] is another saying as explained above. No. [3] can be considered as a sentence in a context like: Katuramye Mukama waitu! Omukama ayaatucungwire. Let us adore our Lord! The Lord that saved us. But even in this form the sentence is not complete. In No. [5] we see a sequence which is not a complete sentence.


Instruction: What is a Complete Sentence?

Response: Such a sentence should have a structure as described earlier in basic components of a sentence. It is the sentence of the type: NP+VNP+V+PPNP+V+Adj.


Instruction: NP+V+PP

Response: NP+V+Adj.  In any sentence, the presence of a noun subject and a verb or its equivalent is usually essential. For instance, in No. [5] above (that is, Enganikyo otasemeriire kufeerwa, The stories that you should not miss), we do have a sentence with a verb kufeerwa (to miss). It can be a sentence in a context like this one: Enganikyo zaawe zisome. Enganikyo otasemerire kufeerwa. (Read your stories! The stories that you should not miss). In the latter sentence, the verb kufeerwa belongs to a relative clause that is not independent. The verb kufeerwa is therefore not the core of a complete sentence. To have a complete sentence, one would need to have a structure like: Noosoma enganikyo zaawe ezi otasemerire kufeerwa. You are reading your stories that you should not miss. In the above sentence the verb kusoma (to read) in noosoma (you are reading) acts as the core verb of the sentence where noosoma enganikyo zaawe (you are reading your stories) is the principal clause while ezi otasemiriire kufeerwa is the subordinate clause (see section on Complex Sentences). Note that a sentence can be incomplete and yet contain more than the basic components. Compare the following in Runyankore-Rukiga: [1] Eminyeeto yaabura. The youth are lost. [2] Eminyeeto yaakora emirimo mirungi. The youth have done good work. [3] Omushaija orikora emirimo omuri Mbarara. The man who will do the jobs in Mbarara. [1] and [2] above are complete sentences that also consist only of basic components, that is, NP + V. However, sentence No. [3] is an incomplete sentence without any principle clause, and yet it contains more than the basic components. In the first place, a complex sentence would be a structure like: Omushaija orikora emirimo omuri Mbarara akunda abaana. The man who will do the jobs in Mbarara, loves children. But then, even the incomplete sentence: Omushaija orikora emirimo omuri Mbarara is not a basic sentence because it has the structure NP


Instruction: +V+NP+PP

Response: +V+NP+PP (omuri Mbarara) which is not an essential component of that incomplete sentence. In other words, the verb kukora (to do) in orikora emirimo does not need the PP omuri Mbarara - in Mbarara.


Instruction: Simple and Complex Sentences

Response: A simple sentence is centred around a single core, usually a verb, while a complex sentence is centered around more than one core (Fromkin et al., 2003). A simple sentence is made up of one clause while a complex sentence, which Brown and Miller (2002, p. 146) explain as "those sentences that can be analysed as consisting of a number of simple sentences" is made of two or more clauses. Let us study the sentences below in Runyoro-Rutooro. Examples: (1) Banywani bange boojo. (2) Petero ali mu Kanisa. (3) Mwijukuru wa nyinazaara akairukira mu bibira bya Buganda. (4) Obwisiki bwa nseeri hali bwikara nibunyetereza. (5) Omwana arukuhurra tabura. (6) Omukazi narra kandi n'omwana narra. (7) Nkugambiire ogende omwa Kaija. (8) Nitusaba omuntu onu agaruke. (9) Kakuba twamurozire tiyaakugenzire. (10) Noobu araija taina eki araakora. (11) Omusuma akairuka nkooku akaba atakairukaga. My friends are boys. Peter is in the Church. The grandchild of his (her) mother-in-law fled into the forests of Buganda. The small girls on the other hill continue calling me. A child who obeys is always noticeable. The woman is crying and the child is crying. I told you to go to Kaija. We are asking for this person to come back. If we had seen him, he would not have left. Even if he comes, he won't be able to do anything (he will have nothing to do). The thief ran like he had never run before. Sentence No. (1) above is a simple sentence. The verb here is represented by ∅ ∅ although it is understood to be the copula verb (to be) under the form ni. Moreover, this ni ni is found in the Runyankore-Rukiga equivalent where the above sentence would be written as: Banywani bangye n'aboojo. My friends are boys. In Kiswahili, we have: Ndugu zangu ni wavulana. My friends are boys. However, in Luganda, the Runyoro-Rutooro structure would re-appear: Emikwano gyange balenzi. My friends are boys. Sentence No. [1] is therefore a simple sentence of the


Instruction: VP+V+NP

Response: VP+V+NP structure. Sentence No. [2] is also a simple sentence. Its core verb is again the copula kuba under the form li li. Its structure is of the type


Instruction: N+V+PP.

Response: Sentence No. [3] is another simple sentence. This is despite the fact that it is the longest out of the ten sentences given. However, it has one core verb. Its structure is in fact of the type


Instruction: NP+V+PP

Response: NP+V+PP. Under a simplified tree diagram representation, it would appear as follows: Mwijukuru wa nyinazaara akairukira mu bibira bya Buganda. The grand-son of his mother-in-law fled to the forests of Buganda. What we have in the above sentence therefore is an expanded noun phrase and an even more expanded verb phrase but the sentence remains a simple sentence. It is the same thing in sentence No.[4] where the noun phrase is expanded, consisting of a noun (obwisiki - small girls) and a noun expansion (bwa nseeri hali - on the other hill); the verb phrase is made up of two verbs - one is kwikara - to remain, to continue - which serves as an auxiliary verb, to the main verb - kwetereza (to call incessantly) i.e. bwikara nibunyetereza - (they continue calling me) - or (they all the time call out for me). Sentence [5] is the first complex sentence where two clauses with two core verbs are clearly noticeable. The first clause, known as the subordinate clause, is Omwana arukuhurra (the child who obeys) - it can be seen that this clause, as a sentence, needs to be completed. It is the other clause, tabura (literally: he is never lost / he is always noticeable) - which gives to the sentence its full meaning. The second clause is called the principal clause and tends to have more autonomy than the subordinate clause. In the above sentence 'The child who obeys' is less autonomous than 'he is always noticeable.' Sentence No. [6] is another complex sentence. It is made up of two clauses more or less of equal value. These clauses are linked by a process of compounding or conjoining. The clause Omukazi narra 'the woman is weeping', has as many chances of standing on its own as the clause omwana narra 'the child is weeping'. The joining word is kandi 'and' which normally belongs neither to the first nor to the second clause. Sentence No. [7] is also a complex sentence. The first, clause is Nkugambiire 'I have told you', the second is ogende mwa Kaija 'you go to Kaija's' or 'I have told you to go to Kaija's.' Both clauses have got core verbs, in the first one kugamba 'to tell' and in the second kugenda 'to go'. It can be said that the clause nkugambiire has less autonomy than ogende mwa kaija - but this will be discussed more in detail in the subsequent sections of this chapter. In sentence No.[8] there are two clauses: nitusaba 'we are asking' which is completed by the second clause - omuntu onu agaruke 'let this person come back' - in other words: 'We are asking for this person to come back' - If we use the literal translation: 'We are asking, let this person come back' - it can be seen that the first clause seems to have less autonomy than the second. Sentence No. [9] is also made up of two clauses: kakuba twamurozire 'if we had seen him' and tiyaakugenzire 'he could not have left' - In this sentence, kakuba twamurozire clearly has less autonomy than tiyaakugenzire. Sentence No. [10] seems to be a particularly interesting one. It is made up of three clauses. The first one is Noobu araija 'even if he comes' - The second is taina 'he doesn't have' and the third is eki araakora 'anything that he can do' - that is: Even if he comes, he won't be able to do anything. This kind of sentence would be made up of a subordinate clause - noobu araija and a principal clause - taina eki araakora - And in this principal clause, another subordinate clause is embedded - eki araakora. Sentence No. [11] is also a complex sentence made up of two clauses: Omusuma akairuka (the thief ran) - is the principal clause - While - nkooku akaba atakairukaga (as he had never run) - is the subordinate clause. The first clause Omusuma akairuka seems to have more autonomy than nkooku akaba atakairukaga.


Instruction: Sentences and Clauses

Response: In traditional grammar, a sentence is made up of a clause. A sentence may be made up of a clause or more than one clause (Kroegger, 2004). Each clause is made up of the basic components of a sentence as exposed earlier. We usually say that a clause has a core verb, apart from a noun subject - at least in most cases. For instance, in: Omuti nigugwa mu kibira. The tree is falling in the forest. There is Omuti (the tree) - the noun phrase subject - nigugwa (it is falling) the verb phrase containing the core verb and mu kibira (in the forest) - a prepositional phrase which can also be called an adjunct to the sentence. The above sentence has one core verb and therefore is a single clause making up one simple sentence. On the other hand, a sentence like: Omuti nigugwa mbere guroleriire. The tree is falling where it is facing. There are two clauses making up one sentence. The principal clause is: Omuti nigugwa (The tree is falling). While the subordinate clause is - mbere guroleriire (where it is facing). It can therefore, be said that every sentence is made up of at least one clause. It can, however, be made of two, three, or even more clauses. Some modern linguists do not make a distinction between sentence and clause. To them, every clause is a sentence, except that some sentences are embedded into others. For instance, in a sentence in Runyoro-Rutooro like: Omwana ou orozirege nyenkya The child whom you saw this morning arugire nambere tutaaha came from where we have been. The following sentences can be identified: [1] Omwana arugire the child has come/came [2] ou orozirege nyenkya whom you saw this morning [3] nambere tutaaha from where we have been It would be said that two sentences [2] and [3] are embedded in sentence No. [1]. What is important to note, however, is that whether these sequences are called clauses or sentences, what is important to note is that they do not all have the same order of importance. They exist in a certain hierarchical order, some being more necessary than others. In normal circumstances, the principal clause or the sentences in which other sentences are embedded, has more capacity of functioning alone than the subordinate clause or the embedded sentence. For instance, in Runyankore-Rukiga: Kuri noomuteera nooreeba If you beat him you will see The subordinate - kuri noomuteera has less chances of standing on its own feet than nooreeba which would mean literally 'you are seeing' - the latter can function as a complete sentence. In the same manner, in a sentence in Runyankore-Rukiga like: Omuti ogwagwa noogwangye The tree that has just fallen is mine The principal clause - noogwangye can be isolated and can stand on its own. On the other hand, Omuti ogwagwa 'the tree that has fallen' needs something to complete it. This does not mean that every principal clause has the capacity to function autonomously. There are those for instance which are embedded in the main verb of the principal clause or which are a compulsory component of that verb. In such cases, they function as a complement of the main verb and since the main verb cannot function satisfactorily without this clause one cannot say that the principal clause where the main verb occurs is autonomous; for example: Noogira oti araagaruka? Do you think he will come? In the above sentence in Runyoro-Rutooro - noogira - is the principal sentence and cannot be complete without the subordinate sentence - oti araagaruka. The verb kugira (to think) in the principal clause is a transitive verb which needs an object. In this case it is the subordinate clause which functions as the object, in other words the subordinate clause acts as the NP of a VP.


Instruction: Verbal and Non-Verbal Sentences

Response: Some linguists consider the verb to be the core or centre of a sentence, at least most of the time. It is usually a verb which is fully conjugated and the essential part of the VP of a sentence. The two sentences below illustrate the point: Omushaija naakora ebirungi. Omushaija naakunda kukora. The man is doing good things. The man likes to work. The verb kukora (to work) in the first sentence is considered as being the head of the VP of the sentence. Some linguists would say that it is the core of the sentence. However, in the second sentence kukora (to work) is a secondary part of the VP whose head is kukunda (to like) and plays here the role of the object of the verb. In the second sentence it is the verb kukunda (to like) and not kukora (to work) as in the first sentence, which would be considered as the core of the sentence. The two sentences above are called verbal sentences, the first having kukora and the second kukunda as the main verb (core verb). There are sentences, however, which do not have such core verbs. They may be called non-verbal sentences, for example: [1] Akati karungi [2] Ihali ringi [3] Ekiro kibi [4] Empisi y'owaanyu [5] Ekigambo kirungi [6] Buculeezi bwa ntaama [7] Obusingye bwa Mukama [8] Obusuma bwa Kampala [9] Petero mutabani wa Kiiza? [10] Abaana b'omusaija ogu! [1] A good stick [2] Too much jealousy [3] A bad day [4] A hyena from your village [5] A good word [6] The sheep's quietness [7] The peace of the Lord [8] Kampala theft [9] Peter the son of Kiiza? [10] The children of that man! The sentences above can be considered as incomplete sentences. Their full meaning is obtained from the context. The first six Runyoro-Rutooro sentences are proverbs. Sometimes one does not need to say the whole proverb. Uttering part of the proverb may give it more impact, or may arouse the attention of the hearer even more. Intonation plays an important role here. It is the intonation that indicates clearly that the sentence is not completed but that the full meaning is expected to be understood. Sometimes, the hearer does complete the second part of the proverb, and the sentence is complete. The six proverbs can be completed as follows: [1] Akati karungi, otema noota ha rugo rwawe. [2] Ihali ringi lihemesa ekituuro. [3] Ekiro kibi kiita embwa kitaho omuntu. [4] Empisi y'owaanyu ekulya neekukumakuma. [5] Ekigambo kirungi kikaraaza empisi ha rugo. [6] Buculeezi bwa ntaama tibugitanga kujuga. A good stick is always for your fence. Too much jealousy makes you laugh at a grave. A bad day witnesses the death of a dog and a person. A hyena from your village eats you while covering you. A good word made the hyena spend the whole night at the fence. The silence of the sheep does not prevent it from bleating. The last four sentences are drawn from different contexts. No. [7] (RunyankoreRukiga) could be uttered at an encounter between two "saved" people or Pentecostals, i.e. as a form of greeting. The full sentence would be: Obusingye bwa Mukama bube naiwe! The peace of the Lord be with you! Sentence No. [8] (Runyoro-Rutooro) is an exclamatory sentence. Obusuma bwa Kampala! Theft in Kampala! Could mean: Obusuma bwa Kampala buhinguraine! There is too much theft in Kampala! Sentence No. [9] (Rn/Rt ) is a question, that needed clarification on what had been said earlier. The previous sentence could have been: Genda oramukye Petero! Go and greet Peter! The full question would have been: Ndamukye Petero mutabani wa Kiiza? Do I greet Peter the son of Kiiza? In sentence No. [10] (Rn/Rt) we have again an exclamatory type of sentence. Abaana b'omushaija ogu! Children of that man! Could mean: Abaana b'omusaija ogu bakasarra! Children of that man are terrible! Note that just as in the first six sentences, intonation plays a major role in the last four sentences. What could often have been said in words is expressed by a certain type of intonation.


Instruction: Thematic and Predicative Sentences

Response: Incomplete sentences (often non-verbal) are often categorised according to whether they represent a theme or a predicate. As explained by Fromkin et al. (2003), a theme is that which we talk about. On the other hand, a predicate is what we say about the theme. In a Runyoro-Rutooro sentence like: Ekitooke kigwire. The banana has fallen. The theme is the 'banana' and the predicate is that 'it has fallen.' In a Runyoro-Rutooro sentence like: Abasigazi abarungi nitubeetaaga (The young men good we need them.) We need the good young men. The theme is: 'the good young men' The predicate is: 'we need them' Many of the non-verbal and many of the incomplete sentences either express a theme or a predicate, as in the following Runyankore-Rukiga sentences: [1] Obusingye bwa mukama. [1] The peace of the Lord. [2] Abaana b'omushaija ogwo. [2] The children of that man. [3] Okukunda bazigu baitu. [3] To love our enemies. [4] Batabani ba Mwesigwa? [4] The sons of Mwesigwa? Sentence No. [1] could be said to be thematic. We are talking about peace. The predicate is what is not overtly expressed, namely that the peace is to be bestowed upon someone. Sentence No. [2] is also thematic. We are talking about the children of a certain man. What is said about them is not overtly expressed. It could be that the children of the man are naughty, nasty or horrible or that they have broken into a shop. All that would be the predicate of the sentence. Sentence No. [3] could be said to be a predicative sentence according to the context. There could have been a previous interrogative sentence of the type. Omukama atwegyesa ki? What does the Lord teach us? And the answer to such a question would be: Okukunda abazigu baitu. To love our enemies. The theme is therefore the Lord, and the predicate that he teaches us to love our enemies. The fourth sentence could be either a predicative or a thematic sentence. If the full sentence would be like: Abaana ba Mwesigwa nibo baija? Is it Mwesigwa's children who have come? Then it is thematic. On the other hand, in a sentence like: Waateera abaana ba Mwesigwa? You have beaten Mwesigwa's children? Then it is predicative.


Instruction: Compounding and Embedding: Complex and Compound Sentences

Response: Complex sentences are usually made up of two types of clauses. There are clauses which are joined together in a sentence in such a way that none of them seems to be more important than the other. Furthermore, each one of them can most of the time stand on its own feet as an independent sentence. In that case we talk of conjoining or compounding. Such clauses constitute what is usually known as compound sentences. On the other hand, some sentences are made up of clauses which do not have equal importance. Some clauses seem to be more important: They seem to have more capacity to stand on their own. In that case we talk of embedded sentences or subordinate clauses for those which seem to be less important than others and principal clauses for those which appear to be more important. Let us look at the following Runyoro-Rutooro sentences: (1) Abaana barwaire kandi nyinabo azaire. The children are sick and their mother has given birth. (2) Nyowe nimbagonza baitu inywe timurikungonza. (3) Araija rundi taije? (4) Omusaija akahika ha saaha ikumi, yaturamukya, kandi yatusiima. I like you but you don't like me Will he come or will he not come? The man arrived at 4:00 p.m., greeted us and thanked us. (5) Bakasanga enju ekingire, baayegarukirayo. (6) Olindeka nkooku wansangire. (7) Akahunirra muno obu baamugambiire eki. (8) Noobu arairuka oraamusanga. (9) Katunihire tuti byona biraahikirra. (10) Naayesunga kandi kunu taine bazaire be. They found the house closed and went back. You will leave me as you found me. He was very surprised when he was told that. Even if he runs you will find him. Let us hope all will go well. He is naughty whereas he does not have parents. In the above examples, the first five sentences are said to be compound sentences. The clauses in each one of them are linked together by conjoining. It is usually said that the linking word belongs to none of the linked clauses. It simply helps to link one clause to another. For instance, in sentence [1] we have two clauses: Abaana barwaire The children are sick k a n d i nyinabo azaire their mother has given birth. In this sentence kandi belongs neither to the first nor to the second clause. It can also be said that each one of the two clauses can stand on its own and function independently from the other. Thus, the clause: abaana barwaire (the children are sick) does not need nyinabo azaire (their mother has given birth) to have a satisfactory meaning. Sentence No. [4] has three clauses. The first is linked to the second by a process of juxtaposition, i.e. one element joined to another without any overt mark. Thus, Omusaija akahika ha saaha ikumi - is joined to - yaturamukya - by a simple comma. In spoken language, this comma is replaced by a brief pause -. The third clause is linked to the second one by an overt mark; i.e., the conjunction kandi "and" - This latter case is the usual process of what we call coordination. There are therefore two processes in compounding: Juxtaposition, when no overt mark is used to link two elements of equal importance. Coordination, when an overt mark is used to link elements of equal importance. We may note that sentence No. [5] is made up of two clauses linked together by a process of juxtaposition only. Another important aspect regarding conjoining in Runyakitara is that the clauses that are conjoined do not always strictly have equal importance. For clauses which indicate a sequence of events, in the past, usually the first clause has the -ka- tense marker while the subsequent ones usually have the −a −a - marker, as in sentence [4] above. One may also note that the first clause with the −ka −ka - marker tends to have more autonomy than the subsequent clauses with the −a −a - marker. Thus in sentence [4] while the first clause; omusaija akahika ha saaha ikumi "the man arrived at 4:00p.m 4:00p.m." can stand alone, it is not quite the same thing with the second clause: yaturamukya "he greeted us" probably because the -a- marker in the second clause indicates that another action has already taken place, and that the present action is a subsequent one. When one says: yaturamukya" the literal translation would be 'and he greeted us.' One can say that in Runyakitara, juxtaposition, which often introduces a different marker for the past, tends also to introduce a certain degree of subordination, in the sense that the subsequent action seems to be dependent on the previous action. This usually happens when the actions are more than two. When, on the other hand the actions are only two, the -ka- past tense marker is usually used in both cases. In that case, the dependency aspect tends to disappear - for example: Akatusiima kandi naitwe tukamusiima. He thanked us and we also thanked him. Note, however, that the usage of −a −a - in the second event is still acceptable. Akatusima kandi naitwe twamusiima. He thanked us and we thanked him also. From sentence No. [6] to sentence No. [10] each one of the sentences is usually called a complex sentence made up of more than one clause. The clauses are linked together by a process of subordination or embedding, by which one clause usually has more importance and is normally capable of having more autonomy than the other clause. In sentence No. [6] for instance, the principal clause is olindeka "you will leave me" - Which is capable of being autonomous. The subordinate clause is: Nkooku wansangire "as you found me.' The subordinating marker - nkooku, "as" is supposed to be part of the clause, and the clause clearly appears less autonomous than the principal clause. It can be represented as follows: olindeka you will leave me nkooku wansangire as you found me In sentence No. [7] the principal clause: Akahunirra muno - is capable of having more autonomy than the subordinate: Obu baamugambiire eki. "When they told him that" In sentence No. [8] Noobu arairuka "Even if he runs" appears clearly subordinated to araamusanga "you will find him". The same remarks apply to sentences No. [9] and No. [10]. What is important to note, however, is that principal clauses, despite their capacity to function autonomously, still need the subordinate clauses to express the full information of a given sentence. Furthermore, even in compound sentences, conjoined or coordinated clauses, (including those joined by juxtaposition) do not enjoy full autonomy from each other. They often have the capacity to function autonomously, but in the sentences where they occur, they need each other to express the full meaning of a sentence.


Instruction: The Simple Sentence

Response: As we saw earlier, a simple sentence is one which is made up of a single clause. We saw earlier the basic structure of a simple sentence. We shall here examine the func- tions or functional relations that can be assumed by the different elements or components of a simple sentence in Runyakitara. In the first place we have to distinguish between the normal sentence and what is known as the verbal in Bantu linguistics as in the following Runyoro-Rutooro examples: (1) Amata gali omu kikopo. (2) Garumu. (3) Enjangu ekataahira mu kihuru. (4) Ekataahiramu. (5) Omukazi akatwekera iba ebbaruha Kampala. (6) Akagimutwekerayo. (7) Enkende etembere ha muti. (8) Etembereho. The milk is in the cup. It is there. The cat entered into the hole. It entered there. The woman sent a letter to her husband in Kampala. She sent it to him there. The monkey has climbed on a tree. It has climbed there. The above are typical examples of simple sentences. The process of agglutination brought about by pronominalisation is very clear in sentences (2), (4), (6) and (8). One notices also the striking difference in English and in Runyakitara. Sentence (6) for instance is a one-word sentence in Runyakitara but has six words in English. The sentences above have the NP + VP; where VP consists of Aux + V + PP. Sentences (5) and (6) are slightly different because their structure is NP + VP + PP, although the PP consists of another PP, by that we mean that: We put the prepositions owa and mu mu (to) and (in) as deep structures which do not appear in our sentence in the surface structure. What the sentence could have been in (5) is as follows: Omukazi akatwek(er)a owa iba ebbaruha mu Kampala. The preposition owa (to) is replaced by the verbal derivative er (in brackets) and the preposition mu mu (in) before Kampala is more or less redundant in Runyoro-Rutooro, unless one wants to emphasise the fact that the husband was in Kampala.


Instruction: The Functions or Functional Relations in a Simple Sentence

Response: The major functions in a Runyakitara sentence are those of Subject, Verb, Object, Complement and Agent. These are terms of classical traditional grammar but which appear convenient for our purposes.


Instruction: Subject and Predicate

Response: Some traditional grammarians divide a sentence into two major functions; the subject and the predicate. For instance, in: Omwana maazanira omu musiri. The child is playing in the garden. Omwana is the subject; maazanira mu musiri is the predicate. Let us examine the Runyankore-Rukiga sentences below: In: Omwana akunda abazaive be munonga. The child loves his parents a lot. Omwana is subject; akunda abazaive be munonga is the predicate. In: Omwana ari omu musiri. The child is in the garden. Omwana is the subject; ari omu musiri is the predicate. In: Omwana naatuteganisa buri kaire. The child is disturbing us all the time. Omwana is the subject; naatuteganisa buri kaire is predicate. From this point of view, the term predicate seems to correspond to VP or VP + PP in transformational grammar. The subject remains what is traditionally known as the doer of 'the action' or as


Instruction: NP

Response: 1  , in Runyakitara that means the NP that comes before the core verb.


Instruction: The Object

Response: The object is usually the element that comes after the verb and which is intimately linked to the verb in such a way that without it the verb lacks something essential. Compare these four sentences ( Ry/Rk Ry/Rk ): (1) Omushaija agwejegyeire. The man is asleep. (2) Omushaija naakunda abaana. The man loves children. (3) Omushaija naakunda abaana munonga. The man loves children a lot. (4) Omushaija agwejegyereire omu kitanda. The man is asleep in bed. In sentence (1), there is no object because the verb does not need one. In sentence (2), the verb kukunda (to love) needs an object hence the presence of abaana (children). In sentence (3), the verb kukunda (to love) still needs the object, abaana (children). Then something extra is added munonga (a lot). This last element is not necessary for the full expression of the verb. That is why munonga (a lot) can be deleted without radically modifying the meaning of the sentence or rendering the sentence non-grammatical. For instance, sentence (2) without munonga is quite acceptable. On the other hand, if in sentence (3) naakunda was removed to leave: Omushaija abaana munonga. One would feel that something fundamental is lacking. In sentence (4) omu kitanda (in bed), is not considered as essential either, because it is absent in sentence (1) and yet that sentence is quite correct. As we saw earlier, an object can be direct, if it comes directly after the verb or indirect, if it is separated from the verb by a preposition or its equivalent. For instance, in: Omushaija wangye naarya oburo. My man is eating millet. Oburo (millet) is direct object. But in: Omushaija wangye naaruga omu kibira. My man is coming from the forest. Kibira is indirect object because it is introduced by the preposition omu which separates it from the verb. Note the difference between a sentence like: Omushaija wangye naaruga omu kibira. My man is coming from the forest. and: Omushaija wangye agwejegyeire omu kibira. My man is asleep in the forest. In the first case, omu kibira will be considered as the object of the verb kuruga 'to come from' because of being closely linked to it. On the other hand, in the second sentence, omu kibira is not considered as an object of the verb kugwejegyera, but rather as an adverbial complement with very loose links with the verb. Some linguists make a distinction between a verb complement, i.e. an element closely linked to the verb or an object of the verb, and a sentence complement, i.e. an element which is only loosely linked to the verb and can be considered as belonging to the sentence as a whole rather than to the verb. In the two sentences above the relationship between omu kibira 'in the forest' and the verb can be shown as follows on a tree diagram. Omushaija wangye naaruga omu kibira. My man is coming from the forest. The second sentence could be illustrated as follows: In the first example, the PP is a complement of the verb or a constituent of the verb while in the second example, PP is a complement or constituent of the sentence.


Instruction: The Complement

Response: Traditionally, the complement is defined as that which completes something else, particularly the subject. For example: Omwana wangye ni murungi. My child is good. murungi - is considered as the complement of the subject omwana wangye. Abashaija bari ha kashozi. The men are on a (small) hill. In the above sentence the PP (prep + kashozi) is considered a complement of the subject abashaija (the men). The term complement, however, can also be used to mean anything that comes to complete the verb, the sentence or any other part of the sentence. In this case, we can talk of a noun complement as in: Omushaija ni murungi. The man is nice. or a verb complement as: Omushaija naaza kushoma. The man is going to pray. or a sentence complement as in: Omushaija naashomera omu kereziya. The man is praying in church.


Instruction: The Verb

Response: The verb itself, though a part of speech, is considered as a function by some grammarians particularly when it acts as the core or node of the sentence. Thus, in the Runyankore-Rukiga sentence: Omwana naakunda kuzaana. The child likes playing. The verb kukunda (to like) will be considered as having the function of verb while the verb kuzaana "to play" will have the function of object or complement of the verb. In the same manner, in the sentence: Tukamureeba naazaana. We saw him playing. The verb kureeba (to see) functions as the core of the sentence with the function of verb, while the verb kuzaana (to play) will function as the complement of the object pronoun mu mu (him).


Instruction: The Agent

Response: In traditional grammar, the function of agent is reserved for NPs in passive sentences that would otherwise have the function of subject. For example: Omukazi naateera omwana The woman is beating the child Subject Verb Object. Omwana naateerwa omukazi The child is being beaten by the woman Subject Verb Agent.


Instruction: Types of Clauses

Response: We have seen earlier that traditional grammar makes a distinction between different types of subordinate clauses basing on both formal but particularly semantic criteria. We shall now make a rapid analysis of some of these clauses. Those we shall examine are: i) The complement clauses; and ii) The relatives.


Instruction: The Complement Clauses

Response: These are the types of clauses where usually the principal clause needs the subordinate clause to be adequately completed. Without the subordinate, the principal clause often looks very incomplete as in the following examples: Ninteekereza (nti) ali hanu. I think he is here. Ndozire nti nookora kurungi. Katunihire (tuti) muraija. Ninkigumya (nti) muntu murungi. Noogira (oti) araagaruka? Naateekateeka kwija. Akatubeiha ngu tarikwija. Ninyesiga noija kukora gye omurimo gwawe. Ningira tarikugaruka. Nimpamya ngu naija kusingura. I see you are doing well. Let us hope you will come. I am convinced he is a good person. Do you think he will come back? He is planing to come. He deceived us that he was not coming. I hope you will do your work well. I think he is not coming back. I am sure he will win. In the above examples, the first five sentences are in Runyoro -Rutooro while the last five are in Runyankore-Rukiga. The first sentence is typical of the type of sentence where the principal clause ninteekereza 'I think' remains very insufficient without the subordinate clause to complete it. The subordinate ali hanu 'he is here' is necessary to complete the sentence. The subordinating conjunction nti or subordinator 'that' can often be understood. Sentence (2) is an example where the principle clause ndozire 'I have seen' could somewhat stand on its own in a specific context. In that case ndozire, could mean that 'I have witnessed all that has taken place and have seen enough'. Otherwise, in normal circumstances, the principal clause ndozire, needs a subordinate to complete it. It can be said that the subordinate clause nti nookora kurungi, 'that you are doing well' can also stand on its own if the conjunction nti is deleted as is often the case. However, the argument is that in the subordinate clause the conjunction is always an integral part of that clause whether overtly expressed or not. As such, a clause like nti nookora kurungi, cannot stand on its own. In sentence (4) ninkigumya, 'I am sure' or literally 'I affirm it' one may say that the clause may stand on its own. However, this is basically because in the clause ninkigumya 'I affirm it' the object pronoun ki introduces an element of redundance since the "thing" being affirmed is what is repeated in the subordinate clause. If the sentence were: 'I am sure he is a good person' then the autonomy of the principal clause would disappear. Moreover, the above sentence, where the object pronoun is not represented, is also acceptable in Runyoro-Rutooro, and in that case, ningumya... is an incomplete sentence. In sentence (6) the principal clause is naateekateeka 'he is planning' which may have autonomy in some contexts but usually needs something to complete it. The subordinate clause kwija - 'to come' - is also an infinitive clause. The latter looks incomplete in every way. Sentence (7) has a principal clause - akatubeiha, 'he lied to us' which could be considered autonomous if the verb kubeiha, 'to lie' is used in absolute terms - i.e: not needing any explanation as to what the lying was about. Otherwise, the subordinate ngu tarikwija 'that he was not coming' is necessary. Sentence (8), (9) and (10) all have principal clauses which cannot be self-sufficient. In (8) ninyesiga, 'I am sure' or 'I am confident' needs something to complete it, especially in the Runyankore - Rukiga version. It is the same with (9) ningira 'I think' and with (10) nimpamya 'I am convinced'.


Instruction: The function of complement clauses

Response: Complement subordinates usually play the role of direct objects or of noun phrase objects. In normal circumstances they can be replaced by an NP object or its equivalent. The main verb in the principal clause is the one that needs to be completed by the subordinate clause which therefore plays the role of NP object. The subordinate clause is therefore part of the VP as illustrated by the tree diagram for sentence no. (2) Complement subordinates therefore serve to complete the sentence by supplementing what is provided in the verb phrase. As the above illustration indicates, these clauses can normally be replaced by a noun or noun phrase.


Instruction: Note on subordinators

Response: This term is used here to refer to the conjunctions or their equivalents which usually introduce the complement subordinates. In Runyakitara, they are not very many, the most frequent being: ngu ngu "that", and - ti ti "that" to which is prefixed different noun class subject prefixes, that is: One could argue that the real conjunction in Runyakitara is ngu ngu, since a conjunction is usually an invariable word, and ti ti cannot be said to be invariable. However, because of its usage, one can also argue that - ti ti plays the role of a conjunction although it is not strictly speaking a conjunction (it could be considered a kind of pronoun).


Instruction: The Relatives

Response: Relative clauses are characterized by the fact that they are usually noun expansions and often play the role of an adjective when the latter functions as an expansion of the noun. Compare the following sentences in Runyoro-Rutooro. [1] Omwana murungi ali hanu. [1] The good child is here. [2] Omwana omurungi ali hanu. [2] The child who is good is here. In the first example we have a simple sentence with the adjective murungi acting as an expansion of the noun omwana. On the other hand, in the second sentence we have a complex sentence made up of the following clauses: Omwana .... ali hanu (The child .... is here) — is the principal clause; and 'Who is good' — is the subordinate relative clause. Note that in Runyoro-Rutooro the clause omurungi 'who is good' does not need a verb which is overtly expressed. The deep structure of this sentence (clause) could be: ou ali murungi owaali murungi As a matter of fact, the structure: owaali murungi (who is good) could be accepted in some contexts. In the three sentences below, one could even say that all of them are correct. [1] Omwana omurungi azooka kara. [2] Omwana anyakuli murungi azooka kara. [3] Omwana owaali murungi azooka kara. A good child is identified early enough. Sentences (2) and (3) seem to lay emphasis on the 'goodness' of the child as opposed to those who are not good. Otherwise the personal opinion of the writer is that (1) and 92) could be used interchangeably while (3) seems slightly more far-fetched or stylistic. Other examples include: Omushaija ori aha ni munywani wangye. Ogu mushaija ou orikureeba ni mukuru. munonga. Ebitookye eby'omuhendo mukye, noobigura aha. Enjura erukugwa omu October ni nyingi munonga. Omuti ogwamuteera ni mureingwa munonga. Emiti ei orikutema n'eya Petero. Abaana abu murikujuma nibaza kubateera. Omukama ou baitsire asigire abaana baingi munonga. Oburwaire obu murikuhurira bwaza kumara abantu. Ebitabo ebi mwashoma bikahandiikwa omushaija ogu. The man who is here is my friend. The man whom you are seeing is very old. Cheap bananas are bought here. Bananas that cost a low price are bought here. The rain that falls in October is plenty. The tree that has hit him is very tall. The trees that you are cutting belong to Peter. The children whom you are insulting will beat you. The King whom they have killed left a lot of children. The sickness which you hear about is going to finish people. The books that you have read were written by this man. The above sentences are in Runyankore-Rukiga. There is a convention in both Runyoro-Rutooro and Runyankore-Rukiga orthography, that when the relative pronoun introducing the relative clause plays the role of subject, then it is joined to the verbal that is part of the relative clause. On the other hand, when this relative pronoun plays the role of object, then it is separated from the subsequent verbal. For instance, in sentence [1] the relative ori aha 'who is here' is made up of ou ari aha but ou ou is joined to ari to make ori, because the relative pronoun is the subject of the relative clause (the man who is here). In Runyoro-Rutooro it would have been: Omusaja owaali hanu — here again the pronoun is ou and the verbal is ali. Conventionally the two are joined to make: owaali - "who is". In sentence [2], on the other hand, the pronoun ou 'whom' is separated from orikureeba 'you are seeing', because here ou has an object function. It is the man who is being seen, and not the one who is seeing. Thus conventionally, we do not write owoorikureeba but ou orikureeba 'whom you are seeing'. Sentence [3] is different from the other examples. The literal translation for Ebitookye eby'omuhendo mukye would be 'The bananas of low price' however, the fact of adding the initial vowel e e - on by'omuhendo mukye 'of low price' makes the phrase become a relative clause. Compare: Ebitookye by'omuhendo mukye. The bananas of low price (value). Ebitookye eby'omuhendo mukye. The bananas which are of low price. In the above case, the rule of combining the relative pronoun with the verbal does not apply since the only overt manifestation of a relative pronoun is the presence of the initial vowel e e - before by'omuhendo mukye 'of low price'. In sentence (4) the relative is combined with the verbal - instead of saying enjura ei erikugwa 'the rain which is falling', we say Enjura erikugwa. In Runyoro-Rutooro, we would have said: Enjura eyeerukugwa omu October (The rain that falls in October). Because 'rain' is subject. It is the same with sentence [5] where ogwamuteera 'which has hit him' is a verbal proceeded by the subject relative pronoun ogu 'which' replacing omuti 'a tree'. Sentence [6] to [10] all have object relative pronouns which are separated from the verbals, i.e: ei ei in [6], abu in [7], ou in [8], obu in [9] and ebi in [10]. It would be interesting to transform the subject relative pronoun in [5] into an object to give a final illustration on how object and subject appear in orthography: [5] Omuti ogwamuteera ni murangwa munonga. The tree that has hit him is very tall. [5a] Omuti ogu orikutema ni muraingwa munonga. The tree that you are cutting is very tall.


Instruction: Conclusion

Response: In this chapter we have seen what a sentence is and of what it is made. We have talked of simple and complex sentences and of clauses within sentences. Syntactic analysis in Bantu languages is quite demanding particularly because the demarcation between morphology and syntax in these languages remains quite evasive. This is therefore an area where a lot remains to be done.


Instruction: References

Response: Brown, K. & Miller, J. (2002). Syntax: A Inguistic introduction to sentence structure. London & New York: Routledge. Fromkin, V., Rodman, R. & Hyamas, N. (2003). An introduction to language (7th Edn.). Boston: Thomson Wadsworth. Kroeger, P. (2004). Analyzing syntax: A lexical-functional approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Lyons, J. (1968). Introduction to theoretical linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.


Instruction: What is Semantics?

Response: O'Grady (1996, p. 268) defines sematics as "the study of meaning in human language". To understand it better, it is important if it can be defined in three ways First, as the scientific study of linguistic meaning (linguistic meaning is the meaning denoted by words, sentences, and expressions). Second, as the science of meaning (that is, the way in which meaning is formed). Third, as the quantity of meaning that is packaged in an expression. This is the ordinary interpretation of the word semantics. Sub-fields of semantics include: Lexical semantics (lexicology: the nature of the words and expressions of a language); conceptual semantics (meanings and concepts); logical semantics (propositions); and discourse meaning. Others are: pragmatics (the study of contextual meaning); computational semantics; onomastics (the science of naming); grammar and meaning (grammatical and semantic interface); compositional semantics (sentential meaning) and diachronic and synchronic perspective of meaning.


Instruction: The meanings of the word 'meaning'

Response: There are many meanings of the word 'meaning' but not all of them denote linguistic meaning. According to Ogden and Richards (1985, p. 186), other meanings of the word meaning are: (i) Explanation: Can you tell me what you mean by your action? In this utterance, 'meaning' stands for explanation. (ii) Purpose or special quality: Life has lost its meaning. In this utterance, 'meaning' represents purpose or quality. (iii) True nature of something: We seem to have forgotten the true meaning of Christmas. In this utterance, 'meaning' denotes the nature of something. (iv) Experience and understanding: Do you know what missing an exam means? In this utterance, 'meaning' denotes an experience and knowledge of something. (v) Intention: What do you mean by doing that to me? In this utterance, 'meaning' denotes intention. (vi) Importance: Health means everything. In this utterance, 'meaning' denotes importance. (vii) Indication: This signpost means that there is a zebra-crossing ahead. In this utterance, 'meaning' has the sense of 'indicate'. (viii) Suggestion: There is no any [meaning] of hatred in this letter. In this utterance, 'meaning' denotes suggestion. These are not linguistic meanings but rather meanings to do with the essence of something, implication of something, inherent order of something, the philosophy (that is, reason) of something. The meanings above can therefore be categorised under broader areas of meaning as shown in the table below.


Instruction: Broader categories of meaning

Response: All the above are not linguistic meanings but other kinds of meaning. Linguistic meaning refers to the thing or idea that is denoted by a word, sentence, or expression. Using the examples above, we can derive linguistic meanings for each of them as shown below.


Instruction: Linguistic meanings

Response: Sentence Can you tell me what you mean by your action? Life has lost its meaning. We seem to have forgotten the true meaning of Christmas. Do you know what missing an exam means? What do you mean by doing that to me? Health means everything.


Instruction: Linguistic meaning

Response: I am surprised by what you have done. Life is meaningless (to me). People no long observe Christmas as they used to do. I am going to suffer because I missed an exam. You have caused me problems because of what you have done. You need to maintain your health. Sentence This signpost means that there is a zebra-crossing ahead. There is no any meaning of hatred in this letter. Linguistic meaning Take care as you drive ahead. The letter does not impute hatred. These examples show that there is a difference between linguistic meanings and other kinds of meaning in the world. The aim of semantics as a language discipline is to investigate and explain the elements involved in the formation of linguistic meaning, and the ways in which they form the meaning. The elements are words, sentences, expressions, among others. There are other disciplines (Philosophy, Fine Art) that study other kinds of meaning, as shown above. They study meanings such as philosophical and artistic meanings respectively.


Instruction: Scope of Treatment of Linguistic Meaning in this Chapter

Response: Most studies investigate linguistic meaning at the level of words, sentences, propositions, context of utterances and discourse. The main thrust of this chapter is to show that the meanings represented by these structures, and the nature of the structures themselves are a result of what pertains in the real world and how it is expressed in a given language. For instance, if a situation occurs where a human entity uses his/her hand to pick an object such as a book from a shelf, assuming the entity is a student and the action has just happened, the situation can be expressed in Runyakitara (Ry-Rk), as: omwegi yaiha ekitabo aha materekyero (The student has removed a book from the shelf). Although the mental encoding of the action 'pick' differs between English as 'get' and Runyakitara as 'remove' respectively, the situation (that is, the event that is obtaining) is the same. It is the expression that speaks about it that differs. Depending on the language, the difference may be in terms of mental encoding which impacts on the lexical decoding (e.g., 'get' versus 'remove' as in the example above), overt marking of definiteness (e.g., 'the' as in the English sentence), etc. The correspondence of what is in language and what is in the world helps to explain the interface between situations in the real world and their encoding in language. The situations in the real world are universal, e.g. 'a human entity picks a book from the shelf' can happen anywhere, but they are encoded (or expressed differently) between languages in terms of communication. Therefore, this chapter explains the link between that which is in the language (in this case Runyakitara) and that which is in the world. It will be called linguistic isomorphism of language and phenomena.


Instruction: Prior Work on Linguistic Isomorphism of Language and Phenomena in Runyakitara

Response: The work in this chapter is not necessarily the first one to talk about language and meaning, particularly on linguistic isomorphism. Prior work on Runyakitara exists which indirectly displays the fact of this aspect. Taylor (1985) identifies several subcategories of Runyankore-Rukiga lexicon, whereby it is representative of the phenomena (entities) in the Runyankore-Rukiga institutional and material environment. Muranga (1990) discusses the meaning and philosophy of Rukiga personal names, reflecting what is in the real world (that is, places). Both Rubongoya (2013) and Mubangizi (1963) tackle examples of parts of speech in Runyoro-Rutooro and Runyankore-Rukiga respectively in a bid to show how Runyakitara words function. The former would also show the semantic properties of words, nouns in particular as the basis of how they are grouped in noun classes. These efforts show how the works aim at portraying the way in which the mind of a Runyakitara speaker perceives the concept that is denoted by a word, and therefore how the word refers to the entity that exists in the real word as a 'concrete' object in the realm of that language. Below are examples of part of the content of the works above.


Instruction: Taylor (1985): Structured semantic fields (Taylor, 1985)

Response: (a) Kinship terminology: ishenkuruza (his/her great-grandfather), nyinenkuruza (his/her great-grandmother), ishenkuru (his/her grandfather), nyinenkuru (his/her grandmother), ishe (his/her father), nyina (his/her mother), mukaishe (his/her step-mother), ishento (his/her uncle), nyinento (his/her aunt), ishenkazi (his/her father's sister), (sic.) nyinashengye [Rukiga] (his/her father's sister). (b) Colour terms: Taylor (1985) deals mainly with the aspect of the naming system of the colour terms in Runyankore, the morphological formation of words for colour, examples of the colour terms and basic colour terms. It is noted that there are prefixes which denote femininity and masculinity in the colour naming system, and that the prefixes have correspondence with those for personal names. Thus, ka ka is prefix for colour terms referring to heifers (cattle), while ru ru - is a prefix for colour terms referring to bulls. A mention of names such as kagaaju (brown female cow) and rugaaju (brown male cow) would therefore justify this observation. Personal names in Runyankore-Rukiga are not necessarily referring to colour but to sex. Such names are common in the traditional society of Banyankore and Bakiga, for example Kambugiro and Rutashaazya, where the former is a name for a woman and the latter for a man. The stems for basic colour terms in Runyankore-Rukiga are given in Taylor (1985) as -era (white), -tukura (red), -iragura (black). The terms are normally adjectival in structure, whereby the prefixes that are attached to them derive from the appropriate noun class marker. Taking an example of the noun class for the word ente (cow), ekirabyo (flower) which fall in noun class 9/10 9/10 (en-/en-) and 7/8 7/8 (eki-/ebi-) respectively, the following would be the description of 'a white cow', 'a black cow' and 'a red flower': ente erikwera (a white cow), ente erikwiragura (a black cow), ekirabyo ekirikutukura (a red flower), omuntu orikwiragura (a darkskinned person). (c) Body parts: The following words among others are listed in Taylor (1985) as part of the inventory of words referring to body parts: rujuga (Adam's apple), okwahwa (armpit), omugongo (back), bladder (oruhago), omwitsyo (breath), finger (orukumu), ekigyere (foot), empiita (sweat). They represent objects/entities in the real world. However, omwitsyo (breath) and empiita (sweat) refer to entities that do not make up the framework of the body. For this reason, they would not be among the terms for body parts. Their appropriate category needs to be identified. Body respiration and body waste materials would be the immediate groupings to think about. (d) Cattle markings, botanical and personal names: Behind the names of cattle given in Taylor (1985) is the argument that the naming is based on the unique features of a cow (also emphasised in Ingfield, 2003), most of which are the markings on the skin. This is verifiable from the following names and descriptions as outlined in the work: kyasha [a cow with a] small patch on forehead mamba [a cow with a] grey and white patch(es) mbarago [a cow with a] clear brown patches mbombo [a cow with] stripped patches gaaju [a cow which is] light brown mayenje [a cow which has] black or white spots all over the body (e) Basic vocabulary: The basic Runyankore-Rukiga vocabulary listed in Taylor (1985) ranges from adjectives to verbs and nouns. It is a list which consists of about two hundred words. Examples of the words include -ona/-ena (all). This is a pronoun stem to which a noun prefix is attached. Others are: kandi; na (and), enyamaishwa (animal), aha (at), omugongo (back), enyima (behind) and -tiina (fear), sic. okutiina, v. (fear). The infinitive form as in the foregoing example is the natural form for citation of verbs. In attempting to give the basic vocabulary of a language, one is aiming at showing the main stream vocabulary of that language.


Instruction: Rubongoya (1999)

Response: The work presents a section of the noun class system and the supposed semantic properties associated with nouns in each class. Noun classes are identified as shown below: (a) Nouns of class 1: Examples: omuntu (person), omwana (child), omunyaihanga (foreigner), omulimambogo (gardener, cultivation of vegetables). The prefix omu- is taken as having a relative meaning equivalent to the meaning of the agentive suffix '-er' in 'gardener'. The question is whether the relative meaning originates from the preprefix (initial vowel), the noun prefix or both. If the form was mulimambogo, without the initial vowel, the relative meaning is inconceivable. The noun prefix -mu- which remains denotes 'omuntu' (person). Its counterpart −ba −ba - as in abantu denotes 'people'. (b) Nouns of class 2: Examples: abantu (people) plural form of omuntu (person), abaisiki plural form of omwisiki (girl), abaana (children) plural form of omwana (child), omwegi (learner) plural form of abeegi (learners). Plural form is an aspect of grammatical categories. Plural is under the grammatical category of number. Singular and plural are both aspects of grammar which impact on meaning. (c) Nouns of class 1a: From what is presented in Rubongoya (1999), this class caters for nouns that do not have the prefix, e.g. names of people as proper nouns. Its counterpart noun class 1 caters for common nouns. (d) Nouns of class 2a: Sub-section (b) above shows that common nouns referring to people have both the prefix and the noun class prefix. Nouns of class 1a are in singular. When they are pluralised, they form class 2a. Examples given in Rubongoya (1999) include baamukaaka (my grandmothers) the plural of mukaaka (grandmother), Baarubuga (queen sisters) the plural of Rubuga (queen). (e) Other noun classes: Other noun classes identifiable in Runyoro-Rutooro as presented in Rubongoya (1999) via noun groups as nouns of classes 3 and 4 , nouns of class 5 , nouns of class 6 , nouns of class 7 and 8 , and nouns of class 9 and 10. Others are nouns of classes 9a and 10a, nouns of class 11, nouns of classes 12, 13 and 14 , and nouns of class 15 . For each class of nouns, Rubongoya (1999) takes note of the semantic properties associated with it. The idea of meaning of the initial vowel above as having a relative meaning falls in this framework of analysis. In light of the question as to whether this meaning represents what is in the world, there seems not to be a direct link between the meaning and the entity it represents. The meaning can be perceived (in mind) even when the object it refers to does not directly exist in the real world. Although this does not apply to all the words and their meaning, it is akin to the mentalist view of how words make meaning. The mentalist view of meaning holds that words denote the mental picture of an entity rather than the entity itself. Therefore, the word book denotes bound pieces of paper for reading or writing. The mental picture denoted by a word is a concept that is aroused in mind by the word. Hence, words denote concepts, and not 'things', directly in their physical form. This conception of meaning is criticised for denying a direct link between a word and the 'thing' it refers to. The aforementioned conceptual representationof meaning is illustrated in the following semantic triangle devised by Ogden and Richards (1985). Figure 5.1. Semantic triangle According to the triangle, a word is symbol for the concept stored in mind (thought). The concept is in relation to referent (that is, thing or object that exists (somewhere) in the (real) world). Therefore, according to this conception of meaning, there is no direct link between a word and its referent. As noted above, this conception of meaning is criticised for denying a direct link between a word and the 'thing'. This criticism is based on the fact that the concept underlying the 'thing' cannot be easily seen as the thing itself. In line with semantic properties, examples of Runyoro-Rutooro nouns and their semantic properties are outlined in Rubongoya (1999) thus: (a) Class 3 nouns are nouns for living things. However, an exception is observed that not all nouns for living things are included in this class (e.g., nouns for class 1 and 2 ). (b) Class 5 nouns some of which are deverbal; e.g., igamba (derived from okugamba 'speak', 'say', 'denote'). i) various abstract notions; ibara (name), igamba (talk about someone's actions or behaviour) ii) time or occasion when something is done; igesa (harvest, reaping time), izaara (anyone of the times when a woman gives birth) iii) verbal idea; igenda (travel, n.), ihiisa (brew, temporal noun) iv) augmentative or pejorative; isaija (manliness), isigazi (boyhood), eryana (childhood) v) magnitude; eriiru [servitude] (c) Class 7 and 8 nouns denote animate objects, inanimate objects, abstracts, emotional values. (d) Nouns of class 9 and 10 include foreign words, names of colours, names of grasshoppers (insects), names of domestic animals, among others. These are taken to be semantic properties of these nouns in Rubongoya (1999), but they are mere types of such words that appear in these noun classes. On the whole, there are many ways in which the word forms under each of the noun classes represent objects that exist in the world. However, the categorisation


Instruction: Semantic Fields

Response: This sub-section focuses on ways of categorisation of words. The different ways are presented, compared and evaluated. Then, it is shown how they represent semantic isomorphism of language in terms of their frameworks. Together, they are viewed under a broader theory of semantic fields. A semantic field is a set of words (or lexemes) related in meaning. For example, a set of the words referring to different colours is a semantic field. This field is referred to as 'words for colour', or as 'colour terms'. Therefore, a semantic field for colour terms would include words such as red, green, black, purple, white, orange, blue, among others. Figure 5.2 below shows a semantic field of colour terms. Figure 5.2. A semantic field of colour terms The words in a semantic field share a common semantic property, i.e. subject matter. For instance, the semantic field for colour terms consists of all words referring to colour. Museveni et al. (2012) make an assumption that words exist as names of things belonging to different domains (that is, semantic fields). The main domains identified in this work which in some respects tends to follow the model of grouping of words in Roget (1987) are indicated below: [1] Words for things of the heavens, earth and cosmology [2] Words for plants [3] Words for animals [4] Words to do with human kind [5] Words to do with human language [6] Words to do with social behaviour in closely related communities [7] Words for agriculture and preparation of foods and beverages [8] Words for livestock farming, milk and meat [9] Words for work and the world of skills [10] Words to do with dressing, ornaments and perfumes [11] Words for travel on land, water and in the air. Each of the broad domains of words has sub-domains. For instance, the domain for words of plants has these sub-domains with corresponding words. Examples in Museveni et al. (2012) include the following (translation and comments are mine, where the source is not indicated): Words for plants amacanda (sunflowers) amababi (leaves) amashaari (tree branches), eishaari (tree branch) eibwa (thorn) amahwa (thorns) Words for grasses, creepers and weeds ekiraare (weeds) encenzilenkyenzi (goose grass) omutanga (inedible pumpkin-like plant) omucuamba (star-grass) Words for mushrooms, mosses and weeds ebituzi (large edible mushrooms), ekituzi (large edible mushroom) entyabirilensyabiri [dialectal difference] (type of large mushrooms) engongi (algae) okuhumba (to catch moulds) okwiha obutuzi (to pick a smaller type of mushrooms) omugina (area where the mushrooms have grown) By using word domains, Museveni et al. (2012) would like to base on the theory of semantic fields to put Runyankore-Rukiga words into (natural) lexical groups based on the natural order of things. The work somewhat deviates from the treatment in Roget's Thesaurus where words are grouped following a philosophical dimension to show semantic fields. Landau (1989) portrays that Roget (1779-1869) divided up vocabulary into six main areas, namely, abstract relation, space, matter, intellect, volition (will) and affections. These do not reflect the philosophical but rather the natural dimension of things. Roget (1989) based on them to compile what is commonly known as Roget's Thesaurus. To get the words under each of the domains in the thesaurus, he looked at the concepts/things and named them. The names of the concepts formed the vocabulary; English vocabulary in this case. For instance, for the concept of 'affections' in Roget (1987), the following classification is found: Affection: general terms, personal, sympathetic, moral, religious Moral: obligation, sentiments, conditions, practice, institutions Practice: temperance, intemperance, sensualism, asceticism, etc. Following both the natural order of things approach and the philosophical dimension approach, it is assumed that it is possible to divide up the vocabulary of a language into semantic fields, much as the two approaches do not yield the same results. Both approaches can also create cross-cutting terms; that is, terms which belong to more than one domain. For instance, in English, love (n.) can belong to 'affection' and 'moral' sub-domains. In Runyankore-Rukiga, ekiraare (weeds) and omucwamba (star-grass) can belong to the plant domain and to the grass domain at the same time. Crystal (2003, p. 104) observes that another inconsistency on the part of semantic fields is that, [There is] ... a great deal of variation as we move from one part of the language to another. For instance, whereas it is easy to make a perfect semantic field for words to do with 'body parts' or 'names of fruits', it is not quite the same for words to do with 'noise' or 'ornaments' (things used for decoration). According to Crystal (2003), some words for "noise" or "ornaments" will not seem to be exactly belonging to the same concept. Examples are music and watch respectively. Cross-cutting terms and fitness of a term in a semantic field create a challenge of getting a consistent approach for establishing semantic fields, and therefore, the need to continue looking for more consistent (precise) divisions of concepts. The question is: under what semantic approach can words be perfectly divided? This is one end that some linguists could have come to in search for perfect divisions of words. The situation-role theory enunciated in Kiingi (2009) moves towards this perfection. In the theory, divisions of all things are enunciated, as in Table 5.3 below. Table 5.3. Division of all things


Instruction: Situations, their Encoding and Expression in Language

Response: Events happen independent of language. For instance, the event (that is, the situation) of a leaf decaying or water boiling. In English sentnec form, these particular situations could be exressed as:


Instruction: The leaf deacayed or The water boils

Response: Both correspond to the sentence pattern Subject + Verb (SV). It is the ame in Runyakitara for sentences like: Omwana yaarira (The child has cried); and Omuti gukooma (The tree dried up). Basing on the situation-role theory, we can show the propositional form of the situations expressed by the sentences. Also, it is possible to show the sentence patters for the propositions. The propositions indicate how the situations are encoded in the mind. Below are examples of sentences from Taylor (1985) and Rubongoya (1999) which are used to illustrate propositional forms and their equivalent sentence patterns. The first line shows the sentence, while the second and the third show the propositional form (based on the symbols in Table 5.3) and sentence pattern respectively (S, V, O, A, S' in the examples represent subject, verb, object, adverbial and clause in that order). Taylor (1985, pp. 90-96) (Ry/Rk): (1) Omuntu akwaise (sic.) enkoni (Someone is holding a stick). h h holds r r; SVO (2) Omwambari naamureeba (I have seen the official). h1 h 1  has seen h2; h 2  ; SVO (3) Mpa akasente (Give me some money). h1 h 1  requests for m m from h2 h 2


Instruction: ; (O)SVO

Response: → → SVOO (4) Yohaana ni omushomesa (John is a teacher). h h is q q; SVC (5) Akeeyeta omukama (He called himself a king). h1 h 1  calls h1q h 1  q; SVOC (6) Omwana akizakiza ishe (The child is different from its father). h1 h 1  is different from h2 h 2  ; SVO (7) Naashushana na ishe (He is like his father). h2 h 2  similar to h2 h 2  ; SVA (8) Wakame yaagarama obwino yaabwanika (Brer Rabbit lay down with his teeth exposed as if it was dead). z z changes to q; q; SVS' (9) (a) Akaitwa omwibi (He/she was killed by a thief). h2 h 2  causes an effect to h1 h 1  (such that h2 h 2  dies); SVO (b) Akaitwa omuze (He/she died of smallpox). b b causes an effect to h h (such that h h dies); SVO (10)Orwabya [rukatika] (The dish broke). r r changes to q; q; SV (11) Abatsigazi baashangwa bakwaitse enjoka (The young men were found holding a snake). h h is holding z z; SVO (12) (a) Embuzi yaabura (The goat has got lost). z z changes (in space); SV (b) Nkafeerwa tata (I lost my father). h h changes to q q; SVO (c) Baasi yantsiga (I missed the bus). h h changes to q;SOV→ q;SOV→ SVO Rubongoya (1999, pp. 95-100, 253-257) (Rn/Rt): (13) Embwa ziboigora (Dogs bark). b b changes; SV (14) Omukazi alimire omusiri (The woman has dug a garden). h h causes an effect to r r; SVO (15) Ekintu kindi omu rubaju (I am feeling pain in the ribs). r r is in l l of h h; SOVA → → SVOA (16) Omwigo bagumuhaire? (Have they given him/her the walking stick). hl h l  gives r r to h2; h 2


Instruction: ; OSOV

Response: → → SVOO (17) Ruhanga akulinde (May God help you). hl h l  benefits hz;(S)OV→ hz;(S)OV→ SVO (18) Mwegesa ninkusaba kuturuka aheeru (Teacher I beg you to let me go out). hl h l  requests q from h2 h 2  ; SVOA (19) Nkasiiba ningada izooba lyagwa (I suffered from morning till sunset). h h changes to q q during t; t; SVS' (20) Nkasiiba ntarukuganda (I did not spend the day suffering). h h does not change; SV (21) Nkaba ningya ha isomero (I was going to school). h h goes to l l; SVA (22) Amata ga siina gangire kujwa (Siina's milk has refused to give the butter forth). r r does not change; SV (23) Genda omugambe mpora mpora (Go and speak to him persuadedly). hl h l  makes a suggestion to h2 h 2  ; SVA (24) Mugaruke mwije na ijo (Come again tomorrow). hl h l  requests for t t; SVA Each of the sentences above presents a situation that obtains in the real world. That is, the sentence is an expression (language) which reflects a situation. The propositions, for example, hl h l  requests for t t (example 24 above) show how situations are encoded in the mind of the speaker of language.


Instruction: Semantic Change

Response: Semantic change refers to a process by which words change in meaning. In relation to isomorphism of language, semantic change is indicative of change in phenomena. Therefore, it means that change in the real world influences a change in language. In the case of words, a change in their meaning is a result of a change in a situation or practice that exists. In the subsequent paragraphs, the content is aligned to changes in the meanings of words to illustrate changes in practices and conceptions. Byakutaga (1996) gives the following Runyoro-Rutooro examples of semantic change. Table 5.5: Runyoro-Rutooro examples of semantic change


Instruction: Causes of Semantic Change

Response: Byakutaga (1996) gives the following causes of semantic change. Development of new concepts (e.g., in the case of ebyaitu) above. The development of new practices (e.g., in the case of entomi) above. Development of new innovations (e.g., the use of computer which apparently was named kalimagezi in Luganda). It is said that originally the word kalimagezi referred to someone who is bright (oyo omwana mugezi 'that child is bright'). The meaning of kalimagezi was extended to mean computer. The examples above in Byakutaga (1996) denote meaning extension of words. Over time, words do extend in meaning. This process is called meaning widening (or broadening). Below are the different ways in which words change in meaning, as described in Murray (1996). The different ways are taken to be the types of semantic change. (i) Semantic broadening: It refers to a process by which a word gains a new sense, in addition to its previous sense or senses. For Runyakitara, the examples in Table 5.5 above, are cases of semantic broadening. A word gains a new meaning without losing its former meaning. (ii) Semantic narrowing: It is a process by which a word loses any of its senses which it used to have. In Runyankore-Rukiga, the word omwigarire which used to mean 'king's wife', today refers more to 'handmaid of God' in the religious sense (Christianity) than its former meaning. Similarly, the word omushumba which used to mean 'employee' and 'cow-herder', today refers more to 'pastor' (in Pentecostalism) than to the former meanings. The former meanings of these words are getting more obsolete, and this portrays gradual semantic narrowing. (iii) Semantic shift: It refers to the process in which a word loses its former meaning, and takes on a new, but often related meaning. For example, in Runyankore-Rukiga the word omukago meant a blood-sealed friendship, but today it means any form of close friendship. Similarly, the word okuramya meant worshipping a traditional god, but today it means Christian worship. (iv) Semantic weakening (that is, suppression of meaning): It is a process by which the meaning of a word is suppressed in terms of its actual sense. In RunyankoreRukiga, the meaning of the word omuhuuku (male slave) is relative to a captive who has been turned into a slave. Today the word is used to mean 'servant' in jocular circumstances when a person wants to tease the other, telling them that he/she is not their servant. In this case the former meaning is suppressed. Incidentally, this trend of usage of the words is steadily gaining momentum. In religious terms (Christianity), the word omuhuuku is constantly used to refer to 'servant of God' or to 'those who are humble before God'. However, this trend of change of meaning has not affected the word omuzaana (female slave) which is the direct opposite of the word omuhuuku (male slave). The latter tends to be used to collectively refer to both males and females whenever used, thus supressing its actual sense. Another example in Runyankore-Rukiga is the expression abanyabuzaare n'abanyamikago, which in its strict sense means 'relatives and friends'. It is normally used as a phrase in announcing the death of someone, but whenever it is used the sense that is carried is: 'all the people who know the deceased' other than 'relatives and friends'. (v) Semantic pejoration and amelioration: The process whereby a term acquires pejorative meaning (i.e., donates disapproval) compared to its ameliorative meaning. In the Runyankore-Rukiga religious discourse, expressions like abairu baawe (your servants) have an ameliorative sense. Traditionally among the Banyankore (Uganda), the word omwiru (a materially poor person) carried a pejorative sense. With the coming of Christianity, it is adopted in expressions like omwiru wa Ruhanga (God's son or daughter) in an ameliorative sense. (vi) Metaphorical change: It is a process by which a word with a concrete meaning takes on a more abstract sense, although without losing its original meaning. The word okuhweza (to visualise) in Runyakore-Rukiga has a concrete meaning, i.e. 'to see with one's eyes'. The speakers may use the word in constructions such as Abo bakahweza kare; baine entunguuka (Those became clever; they have developed). In this sense okuhweza means to be 'quick-witted'. This is a more abstract and recent meaning denoting metaphorical change. (vii) Loss of lexical items: This refers to words which are no longer used in a language. The words enyamuziga (bicycle), engondoore (ram) and ekizibaho (coat) are examples of Runyankore-Rukiga words that are now obsolete. New words, instead, are used to mean the same entities; i.e., egaari, empaya y'entaama and egooti/ekooti respectively. The processes of lexical change (as described above) form part of semantic change. Semantic change causes language change. Whether it is lexical change or semantic change, there is need to examine the intrinsic factors that underlie these processes. Taking an example of entomi (fist) in the examples above, the entity it refers to denotes a biotic object. It extended in meaning to 'bribe', which denotes a material object. This change is indicative of new phenomena that happen in the real world and how it is encoded in the human system of communication (that is, language). The new phenomena happen independent of language. Their encoding or conceptual existence (Namyalo, 2014) in the language is consequential with the occurrence of the phenomena. The phenomena (or situations) that take place in the real world can be new. They can also be old, or intermediary (neither old nor new). They can be positive or negative. They can be relational. The phenomena that get out of place in the real world cause a concurrent effect in the language. For instance, in the case of word loss, words are less used, and eventually get lost, leading to word loss. The theory of linguistic isomorphism as explained for language change, word classification (word domains) and sentence structure applies to other semantic features of language. These are meaning relations which include antonymy, synonymy, hyponymy/hypernymy, semantic incompatibility, among others described below.


Instruction: Antonymy

Response: Antonymy is the relationship of oppositeness of meaning. Antonyms are opposite word forms in a language. Examples of antonyms in Runyakitara include omutsigazi (young man) versus empangare (grown up girl), omushaija (man) versus omukazi (woman). Antonyms therefore denote oppositeness of concepts. The concepts may be concrete or abstract objects that exist in the real world as the examples above would indicate. That is to say that there exists a pair of entities, e.g. 'girl' and 'boy' in the world. For purposes of communication, they have names in the language. The names must be opposites of each other since the entities they refer to are. Crystal (2003) identifies gradable antonyms, complementary antonyms and converse antonyms. The work goes ahead to define them as follows: Gradable antonyms show the expression of degree, e.g. small/big, wide/narrow, Complementary antonyms express binary contrast, e.g. male/female, single/married. Converse antonyms include terms whereby the meaning of one presupposes the meaning of another, such as sell/buy, parent/child. Much of these examples represent entities or ideas which are in the real world in terms of physical size ('big' or 'small'), physical binary contrast ('male' or 'female') and sequence of things ('sell' and 'buy'). In the following section, examples of antonyms in Runyakitara are listed. Their translation and categorisation show how they also lend themselves to the theory of linguistic isomorphism, i.e. that their meaning and relationship cast the entities that are in the real world and their nature of juxtaposition. Table 5.6. Examples of antonyms


Instruction: Synonymy

Response: Different from antonymy, synonymy is the relationship of sameness of meanings of words (Crystal, 2003). Hurford and Heasley (1983) define synonymy in specific terms. They render synonymy as the relationship of words in terms of the meaning(s) that they have in common. Here, the assumption is that not all meanings are the same between a pair of words. They give an example of 'hide' (v.) and 'conceal' (v.) which are not the same in all of their meanings. According to Palmer (1981) there is no perfect synonymy. Each word in a pair or group of synonyms will have a distinctive meaning from the other or others. The distinction may be in terms of dialectal differences, style, metaphoricity, among others. Runyakitara examples for synonyms based on the strict definition of synonymy are as follows:


Instruction: Sentence

Response: The fruits were hidden behind the fridge. Words can hide meaning. Some people hide the truth. The illicit consignment was concealed in boxes of textbook materials. The enemy concealed himself. Meaning of hide/conceal (1) To keep something in a place so that people do not see it (2) To make something appear less obvious (3) To cover up what is supposed to be known (1) To put something in another for purposes of hiding it (2) To keep something in a secret place to deny other people access to it From the meanings above, there is similarity between meanings (1) and (2) of 'hide' and 'conceal' respectively. Similarity and dissimilarity of meaning is a representation of the phenomena that occurs in the world (that is, the events entailed in the words are real). Therefore, this conforms to the isomorphism of language and phenomena (linguistic isomorphism).


Instruction: Hyponymy versus Hypernymy

Response: Hyponymy is the relationship of inclusion of the meaning of a word in the meaning of another. The meaning of the word 'car' is included in the meaning of the word 'vehicle', for example. The word which includes the meaning of another is a hypernym. It expresses the relationship of inclusion of the meaning of a word in the meaning of another. The objects represented by hyponyms and hypernyms exist in the real world, but their meaning is described in words. For instance, 'a car' exists as a single object 'car', and 'a vehicle' is any object that moves by the power of an engine. Much as each exists singly, it is part of the others whose collection forms a virtual form. Therefore, the word 'vehicle' represents what exists in the real world in virtual form. Like other languages, Runyakitara words denote entities that have concrete and virtual existence in terms of hyponymy and hypernymy. The word ente (cow) has the latter quality. Its hyponyms are enyana (calf), enumi (bull), ejigija (heifer), encwamutwe (new born calf) and omutavu (calf).


Instruction: Polysemy

Response: Polysemy refers to relationship of the multiple meanings of a word by extension of its basic sense. Examples of words with multiple meanings can be cited in Rubongoya (2013) as shown below. okwetumbura (v. refl.) to pride oneself, flatter oneself on, stand on tip toe; pluck up courage; abantu abamu kwetumbura kubagiza ensoni (some people regard flattering oneself as a shameful thing.) okugaba (v.i) to distribute, to give away, to contribute, give in marriage, send out (army); ebintu bye abigabira abanaku (he/she gives his/her belongings to the poor); ija ongabise ebyokulya (come and help me distribute food). okutagaarra (v.i.) to take up much space, spread out, extend; abaikaarra omumotoka bafunzire tibatagaraza maguru gaabo (those who sit in a car in excess do not spread out their legs). The relationship of multiple meanings of words lies in the conceptual sense that cuts across the set of the meanings of a polysemous word. In the examples above underlying concepts are 'stand out' for okwetumbura, 'give out' for okugaba and 'spread apart' for okutagaarra.


Instruction: Homonymy and homophony

Response: While other sense relations involve the shape of the meaning of words, others involve the relationship in the shape of the words themselves. The latter sense relations are referred to as homonymy (that is, the sameness of the shape of words). Homonyms are of different types, namely, homologues and homomorphs. Homologues are of two sub-categories: homographs and homophones. Homographs are different words with the same spelling. Homophones are words of different spelling but with the same pronunciation. Crystal (2003) offers the following examples for English language: 'bank' (building) vs 'bank' (ground), and 'threw' vs. 'through' for homophones. Homomorphs are same shape of words belonging to different parts of speech, e.g. 'water' (n.) and 'water' (v.) Although different in shape, homonyms as words represent different entities in the real world. However, the language form makes them similar or different in shape. The origin of the shape for homophones may be quite clear: similar pronunciation of words. The same goes for homomorphs, which are a result of conversion. It is not clear what the origin of homographs is. Lyons (1977), Crystal (2003) and Soanes (2001) trace their origin under etymology. Lyons (1977) gives an example of 'port' 1 (harbour) and 'port' 2 (kind of fortified wine) which are distinct words. It is maintained in this work that the former is derived from Latin (portus 'port') which is a reconstruction of the form ford (Modern English), while the latter is derived from 'Oporto' the name of a city in Portugal through which wine was exported. It is also noted in this work that the name of the city came from the Portuguese expression 'o porto' which meant 'the harbour' and originated from Latin 'porto'. From this background we note that since the words in question denote unrelated concepts (harbour and drink, wine) each concept needs a different name; that is, word. Therefore, instead of having one word for both meanings (polysemy), each is denoted by a different word (homonymy). In Runyakitara, words are spelt according to how they are pronounced unlike in English, for instance, where it is not the case. There is no mismatch between phonetic and phonemic representation in Runyakitara. Runyakitara words such as omukama (king) have letters represented by the same grapheme as the sounds. But the word 'Chemistry' in English has sound /k/ /k/ which is represented by ' ch ' as the grapheme. Therefore, a language with matching phonetic and phonemic representation as Runyakitara is not expected to have homophones. Homomorphs are also not expected since they come about as a result of stress placement. Being a non tresstimed language, Runyakitara is not expected to enlist homomorphs. Runyakitara has homographs such as shown below for Runyankore-Rukiga: omuti (tree)/omuti (concentrated banana juice), engoma (drum)/engoma (throne), amahembe (horns)/amahembe (witchcraft)/amahembe (bicycle handlebars). To be noted is that homography involves words each of which represents an independent entity in the real world. Homographs are to the language, while the entities they represent are to the world. Again this equals to linguistic correspondence between language structure and phenomena (linguistic isomorphism).


Instruction: Conclusion

Response: In this chapter, various semantic perspectives of the correspondence of what is in the language and what is in the world have been explored in respect of Runyakitara. This concept of correspondence has been termed as semantic isomorphism of language. The perspectives explored include from semantic fields, noun class semantic properties, divisions of words and situations, semantic change and meaning relations. In each case, the language structure has been presented, and commented on in terms of how it is a representation of phenomena that exist in the world environment of the speaker. Several more linguistic insights have been arrived at in this chapter. They include criteria for determining linguistic meaning, approaches to compilation of thesauruses, compilation of a lexicon, encoding/expression of meaning, examples of semantic change and meaning relations in Runyakitara, among others. The chapter portrays that the occurrence of phenomena is independent of language, but language is used to express it for purposes of communication. The implication of this is that the more we study the language the more we appreciate it and use it to communicate better.


Instruction: References

Response: Byakutaga, S. C. (1996). Language corruption or change? The case of Runyakitara. Makerere Papers in Languages and Linguistics, 1(3), 12-21. Fergusson, R. (Ed.) (1986). The Penguin dictionary of English synonyms and antonyms. London: Penguin Books Ltd. Hurford, J. R. & Heasley, B. (1983). Semantics: A coursebook. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Infield, M. (2003). The names of Ankole cows. Kampala: Fountain Publishers Ltd. Klingi, K. B. (2008a). The semanticosyntactic bridge. Kampala: Unpublished paper, Makerere University Institute of Languages. Klingi, K. B. (2008b). The semanticosyntactic bridge I. Retrieved from: http://lu-ganda.ugaccommodations.com/Semanticosyntacticbridge.pdf. Klingi, K. B. (2009). The semanticosyntactic bridge II. Retrieved from: http://lu-ganda.ugaccommodations.com/The\ Semanticosyntac-tic%20Bridge%20II.pdf. Landau, S. I. (1989). Dictionaries: The art and craft of lexicography. New York: Cambridge University Press. Lyons, J. (1977). Semantics (Vol. 2.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Mubangizi, B. K. (1963). Kanyarurimi 1. Mbarara: Omuhanda gw'Okumanya. Muranga, M. J. K. (1990). Pessimistic nomenclature in south west Uganda. Makerere Papers in Languages and Linguistics (1), 64-84. Murray, R. W. (1996). Historical linguistics: The study of language change. In O'Grady, W., M. Dobrovolsky & F. Katamba (Eds.), Contemporary linguistics: An introduction ( 3rd 3 rd Edn.) (pp. 344-346). London/New York: Longman. Museveni, Y. K., Muranga, M. J. K., Gumoshabe, G., & Muhoozi, A. N. (2012). Kandondoozi y'Orunyankore-Rukiga: A thesaurus of Runyankore-Rukiga. Kampala: Fountain Publishers. Namyalo, S. (2019). Modernisation of Luganda terminology in the field of linguistics. Kampala: Makerere University press. Ndoleriire, O., Kintu, J. & Kasande, H. (2009). Runyoro-Rutooro-English dictionary. Kampala: Fountain Publishers. Ogden, C. K., & Richards, I. A. (1923, 1985). The meaning of meaning. London: AKR Paperbacks. O'Grady, W. (1996). Semantics: The analysis of meaning. In O'Grady, W., M. Dobrovolsky & F. Katamba (Eds.). Contemporary linguistics: An introduction (3rd Edn.) (pp. 268). London/New York: Longman. Oriikiriza, C. (Ed.). (2007). Kashoboorozi y'Orunyankore-Rukiga. Kampala: Fountain Publishers Limited. Palmer, F. R. (1981). Semantics (2 nd nd Edn.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Roget, P. M. (1987). Roget's Thesaurus of the English words and phrases. London: Longman. Rubongoya, L. T. (1999). A modern Runyoro-Rutooro grammar. Cologne: Rüdiger Köppe Verlag. Rubongoya, L. T. (2013). Runyoro-Rutooro/English and English/Runyoro-Rutooro dictionary (1 st st Edn.). Fort Portal: Modrug Publishers. Soanes, C. (2001). The Oxford dictionary of current English. London: Oxford University Press. Taylor, C. (1985). Croom descriptive grammars: Nkore-Kiga. London: Croom Helm. van Noppen, J. P., & Dierickx, J. (2003). Crystal. The Cambridge encyclopedia of language (2 nd nd Edn.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.