Instruction: Explain the following grammar rule in Runyoro/Rutooro: Tukabura We got lost

Response: Nitumanya We know (R/Rt) We also saw that a compound form contains an auxiliary ba ba to which is attached a tense and the main verb whose form comprises the aspect, for example: Tukaba tubuzire We had got lost Tuliba nitumanya We shall be knowing (R/Rt) Complex forms on the other hand tend to look like simple forms, in the sense that they comprise a simple verb, what one would call the main verb. However, as opposed to the simple form, the complex form is characterized by several tense/aspect markers which combine to bring out one meaning. The final product is sometimes difficult to characterize as a tense or an aspect as it most often also incorporates mode and sometimes negation. The following complex markers can be enumerated. As said earlier, the above forms portray different notions which include mode (-aa-ku...ire, -kaa----ire), aspect (ti---ki---ire, ni---ki---a---), (-a---aa----ire, - a−−−−ga a−−−−ga ) and tense ( −a−−aa−ga− −a−−aa−ga −  ). These forms, taken as morphemes, are what one could partly call discontinuous morphemes. Taken in isolation, the different forms could mean something else but brought together, they convey a different meaning. For instance, in -aa-ku---ire, -aa---- alone could express the immediate perfective, −ku −ku - the infinite ire the [perfective] ( Rn/Rt) Rn/Rt). But when they are brought together, they express the conditional (or hypothetical mode) in Runyoro-Rutooro. Let us have some examples to illustrate how the above complex forms work in real sentences: (i) -aa-ku------ire mwakugenzire (mu-a-ku-genz-ire) you should go (now) bakubatiire (ba-a-ku-ba-ti-ire) (Rn/Rt) they should beat you (now) (ii) ti--ka----ire tibakaizire (ti-ba-ka-iz-ire) they have not yet come (iii) --kaa------- ire tukaamusiimire [tu-kaa-mu-siim-ire] (Ry/Rk) we should thank him (now) (iv) ni--ki-(a)----- nibakyalinda [ni-ba-ki-a-lind-a] (Rn/Rt) they are still waiting nitukishoma [ni-tu-ki-shom-a] (Ry/Rk) we are still at School (v) ti--ka----ga timukazinaga [ti-mu-ka-zin-a-ga] you have never danced (vi) -a-----ga baaraaraga mu mazina [ba-a-raar-a-ga] they used to spend the night dancing (vii) -aa-----ire naakozire [n-aa-koz-ire] I have worked enough -a-----ire Obu namurozire yairuka When I saw him, he ran away (R/Rt) Ku naamureebire yairuka When I saw him, he ran away (R/Rk) We note that the Runyankore-Rukiga form -aa----ire could have the following meanings: (1) Enough - n-aa-ri-ire pron. vp subj. eat 'I have eaten enough' (2) Recent and far past in subordinate clauses (example given in vii - When I saw him, he ran away). (3) The present perfect Very often, where the Runyoro-Rutooro speakers use -ire, RunyankoreRukiga speakers use -aa--ire as in Runyoro-Rutooro, for example: tu−li tu−li-ire 'we have eaten' Runyankore-Rukiga (i) tu-aa-ri-ire 'we have eaten' or. (ii) tu-aa-ri-a 'we have eaten' Further study should be undertaken whether Runyankore-Rukiga speakers use -aa-ire in (i) and -aa- in (ii) interchangeably or whether there are some nuances of meaning. (viii) raa----ga Oraazaaraga nosaalirwa. You will always give birth in pain (Rn/Rt) o-raa-zaar-a-ga ni-o-saal-ir-w-a (ix) -raa--------e This form is common in Runyankore-Rukiga both in subordinate and principal clauses in relative, conditional and temporal clauses, among others. Let us look at these examples: a) Relative: Abaraashashure [a-ba-raa-shashur-e], nibo [ni-bo] baraarye [ba-raa-rie] (Ry/Rk) Those who pay will be the ones to eat. b) Conditional: Ku oraamureebe, [ku o-raa-mu-reeb-e] omusiime [o-mu-siim-e] If you see him, thank him. c) Temporal: Ku baraije [ku ba-raa-ij-e], nitubaakiira [ni-tu-ba-akiir-a]. When they come, we will welcome them. d) Noobu oraakore [na-obu o-raa-kor-e], toraaheze [ti-o-raa-hez-e] Even if you work, you won't finish.


Instruction: Explain the following grammar rule in Runyoro/Rutooro: Compound Forms Derived from Complex Forms

Response: Since complex forms sometimes have an element of tense or aspect, they can also be found in compound forms whereby an aspect is situated in time or a tense puts an aspect at a given point in time. Let us recall, for instance, that: n-aa-ku-genz-ire means 'I should go' now. This means the hypothetical form is situated in the present. And that: ni-tu-ki-a-gend-a means 'We are still going' In here the concept of aspect is very dominant, that is: an action still going on. There is, however, also a notion of tense - now. That is why, some of the above complex forms can sometimes function as tense whereas some can function as aspect, when they combine in compound forms. Let us give below a summary of what has been said: Chart 9:


Instruction: Explain the following grammar rule in Runyoro/Rutooro: The Narrative

Response: −a∼aa− −a∼aa− and the 'imperative' −e −e We have decided to discuss these two forms separately because they do not fall in any of the categories of forms discussed above. These are forms which do not occur on the normal simple indicative and affirmative sentence. They usually occur in special types of sentences as we shall see below: a) The Narrative −a−∼aa− −a−∼aa−


Instruction: Explain the following grammar rule in Runyoro/Rutooro: Let us remember that

Response: −a−∼aa− −a−∼aa− has already been presented as a marker that has several functions/meanings. We saw that it can express an action that has just taken place and in the case of Runyankore/Rukiga especially, the perfective aspect (where it operates in free variation with -aa----ire) and the near past (where in RunyoroRutooro one would find -ire or -irege).


Instruction: Explain the following grammar rule in Runyoro/Rutooro: Apart from the above

Response: −a −a - in Runyoro-Rutooro or −aa −aa - in Runyankore-Rukiga can also function as a conditional variant of −ka −ka-, the far past. Whereas −ka −ka - is used in past events that may occur in isolation, a−∼aa a−∼aa is used where there is a succession of past events. For example: Omukama akaswera The king got married. Ebisoro bikabura The animals got lost. Amasomero gakatandika ira (Ru/Rt) (Ru/Rt) The schools opened a long time ago. Omwana waitu akazaahira mu mahanga. Our child got lost abroad. But: Abagyenyi bakaija, twabashemererwa twabakunira. (Ry/Rk) The guests came, we welcomed them warmly and we entertained them. Ku omwana yaatureebire, yairuka. (Ry/Rk) When the child saw us, he ran away. Omufumu akatandika kugamba, yaagamba ebintu bingi, yaatuhana, yaatuha obwengye. The doctor started talking; he said a lot of things, he advised us and gave us direction. (Ry/Rk) The examples in Runyoro-Rutooro portray single events while those in Runyankore-Rukiga show a succession of events. As can be seen, the event that follows another is usually expressed by using the form −a −a - rather than −ka −ka - or −aa− −aa− ire in the case of subordinate clauses. This rule applies both in Runyoro-Rutooro and in Runyankole/Rukiga; that is, a single past event is expressed by −ka −ka - while events following each other are expressed by −a−∼aa −a−∼aa. Note, however, that the first event is usually expressed by −ka −ka - and the subsequent ones by −aa−∼a− −aa−∼a−, as shown in this example in Runyoro-Rutooro. Hakaimuka omusaija, yaswera omukazi, baazaara abaana bingi, abaana baatandika kukura, baitu aho enjara yagwa nyingi. 'There was once a man; he got married to a woman, they got children, the children started growing up; but then a great famine came'. In the above example, the first is expressed by using the form −ka −ka - while the subsequent ones are expressed by −a− −a−. On the other hand, in complex sentences, the first past event is expressed by - −aa−∼−− −aa−∼−− ire ∼−a−−− ∼−a−−− ire and the next one by −a−∼−aa− −a−∼−aa− or −ka− −ka−. For eample: Obu nasingire, mukansiima. (Rn/Rt) When I succeeded, you congratulated me. Obu naasingire, mwansiima. (Ry/Rk) When I succeeded you congratulated me. Ku twamuteire, yaarira. (Rn/Rt) When we beat him, he wept. Ku twamuteire, akarira. (Ry/Rk) When we beat him, he wept. b) The "imperative" -e. The term "imperative" is put in inverted commas because the form -e expresses more than the imperative. The true imperative in Runyakitara is the absence of any marker, including the absence of the prominal marker. For example:


Instruction: Explain the following grammar rule in Runyoro/Rutooro: The only marker one can talk of is the

Response: −a −a that is usually found at the end of a verb (verb final). What we may call the indirect order, however, is expressed by −e −e which replaces −a −a.


Instruction: Explain the following grammar rule in Runyoro/Rutooro: The form

Response: −e −e is also used as a request or a polite order. In this case, intonation also has a role to play, for example: Otuhe ebyolulya byaitu bya hati (o-tu-h-e) (Rn/Rt) Give us our daily bread! The form −e −e can also be used in negative forms whereas in the affirmative the verb final is usually −a −a, for example:


Instruction: Explain the following grammar rule in Runyoro/Rutooro: The examples above indicate that it is difficult to categorize

Response: −e −e as a tense or an aspect. It may be considered in the category of mode whereby it may express indirect order, desire, request, prayer, et cetera. It is also used in negative forms.


Instruction: Explain the following grammar rule in Runyoro/Rutooro: Summary of Temporal Adverbials or Time Indicators

Response: Most tenses in Runyakitara sentences need a time indicator for an event or an action to be contextualised. Such indicators or temporal adverbials fall in three categories, that is, those situated in the present, those in the past and those in the future. The table below will highlight the most common temporal adverbials as expressed in the four major dialects of Runyakitara.


Instruction: Explain the following grammar rule in Runyoro/Rutooro: Simple Forms

Response: i) Pure tenses −ka− −ka− far past -irege recent past -raa- near future -li - far future -rya- far future example dialect tukazina Ry/Rk Ry/Rk and Rn/Rt Rn/Rt tuzinirege Rn/Rt Rn/Rt turaazina Rn/Rt Rn/Rt tulizina Rn/Rt Rn/Rt turyazina Ry/Rk Ry/Rk ii) Tenses and Aspects


Instruction: Explain the following grammar rule in Runyoro/Rutooro: Adverbs

Response: Adverbs in Runyakitara are words that describe a verb, an adjective or a whole sentence. There are adverbs of time, place, frequency, manner, negation, affirmative adverbs, emphatic/enclitic adverbs and interrogative adverbs.


Instruction: Explain the following grammar rule in Runyoro/Rutooro: Adverbs of Time

Response: These are adverbs that show the time of an action and answer the question `when?' Examples include:


Instruction: Explain the following grammar rule in Runyoro/Rutooro: Adverbs of Frequency

Response: These are words which answer the question `how often?' (kaingahi/kangahi?). Examples are:


Instruction: Explain the following grammar rule in Runyoro/Rutooro: Adverbs of Place

Response: These are words which answer the question 'where?' Examples:


Instruction: Explain the following grammar rule in Runyoro/Rutooro: Adverbs of Manner

Response: These are words which show how an action has been done. They answer the question `How?' (-ta?). Examples are:


Instruction: Explain the following grammar rule in Runyoro/Rutooro: Adverbs of Negation

Response: These are words which show negation. Examples:


Instruction: Explain the following grammar rule in Runyoro/Rutooro: Affirmative Adverbs

Response: These are adverbs of agreement. They include:


Instruction: Explain the following grammar rule in Runyoro/Rutooro: Emphatic Adverbs

Response: These emphasise the state of something. Examples:


Instruction: Explain the following grammar rule in Runyoro/Rutooro: Interrogative Adverbs

Response: These are questions that inquire about the time, place, manner, frequency, etc. Examples include:


Instruction: Explain the following grammar rule in Runyoro/Rutooro: Conclusion

Response: In this chapter, the major characteristics of the verb have been presented. Emphasis, however has been on tense and aspect in Runyakitara, an area which is quite complex and which requires more research. The next chapter will introduce us to syntax; how morphemes and words combine to make sentences.


Instruction: Explain the following grammar rule in Runyoro/Rutooro: References

Response: Guillaume, G. (1970). Temps et verbe: théorie des aspects, des modes, et des temps: suivi de L'architectonique du temps dans les langues classiques. H. Champion. Ndoleriire, O. K. (1980). Essai de recherche en linguistique contrastive sur les systmes verbaux Rutooro-Francais. (Unpublished PhD Dissertation. Paris: Sorbonne Nouvelle University.) Neveu, F. (2004). Dictionnaire des sciences de langage. Paris: Armand Colin. Nurse, D. (2008). Aspect and tense in Bantu languages. In D. Nurse, & G. Philippson (Eds.). (2008). The Bantu languages. London: Oxford University Press. Rubongoya, L. J. (1999). A modern Runyoro-Rutooro grammar. Cologne: Rudiger Koppe Verlag.


Instruction: Explain the following grammar rule in Runyoro/Rutooro: Footnotes

Response: 2 The aspect of verbal extensions or verbal derivatives will be handled in another study (c.f. Rubongoyo, 1999, p. 187-205). ↩


Instruction: Explain the following grammar rule in Runyoro/Rutooro: THE SYNTAX OF RUNYAKITARA Oswald Ndoleriire

Response: What is Syntax? A simple definition of syntax, as Fromkin and his co-authors (2003) explain, could be summed up as the rules that govern words to form phrases and sentences. A sentence will be described in the subsequent paragraphs but we can take the phrase to be something as big or bigger than a word but normally smaller than a sentence. A phrase is usually centred on a key word category, like a noun, a verb, an adverb or an adjective. Thus, we have noun phrases whose key words are a noun, verb phrases whose key word is a verb or adjectival phrases whose key word is an adjective. In English, for instance the good boy is a noun phrase, very dirty is and adjectival phrase, plays rugby is a verb phrase and to the forest is a prepositional phrase. In that regard, Brown and Miller (2002) citing Lyons, talk of the sentence as having a certain sort of unity, being grammatically complete, capable of standing on its own, independent of context and having a degree of semantic independence.


Instruction: Explain the following grammar rule in Runyoro/Rutooro: Sentence in General

Response: It is not easy to find a satisfactory definition for the term 'Sentence'. Lyons (1968) defines sentence as "A grammatical unit between the constituent parts of which distributional limitations and dependencies can be established, but which can be put into no distribution class". On the other hand, traditional grammar emphasises the semantic aspect of the sentence. The sentence is supposed to be a group of words or a chain of words with a complete meaning. In written language it is said that, apart from complete meaning, a sentence starts with a capital letter and ends with a full stop. This type of definition has met with a lot of opposition from different linguists and grammarians. For instance, it is not clear where a 'complete meaning' starts and where it ends. If in English for instance, a sentence like: 'The father loves his children' is said to have a complete meaning, one may ask whether a sequence like: 'The father loves his children; he is right', or 'And the father who loves his children', or even, 'The father's love for his children', have complete meaning or not. In different contexts, all the above could be said to be sentences. In some cases, a sentence can be made of only one word, such as: 'Fantastic!' Or of a semi-paragraph, like in: 'The father who loves his children for the sake of parental duty and the one who loves them from the sentimental point of view are all parents with something for and against their approach in either case; in effect, each one has something that could be of great importance to the child both from the psychological and from the social point of view, the age of the child notwithstanding.' Because of this kind of disparity in what may be regarded as a sentence, some linguists have preferred describing a sentence in terms of its different attributes which include: Possession of a certain coherence between the words that constitute it. Possession of a certain internal autonomy, such that it can in most cases stand on its own. Possession of certain types of intonation patterns, either rising and falling, or falling, or falling and rising, or rising, etc. Possession of a certain type of pause both at its beginning and at its end. Possession of a certain internal structure. Possession of a certain meaning. It is the sum total of all the above which would normally determine what a sentence is. Some grammarians have summarised the above by saying that a sentence should be characterised by a certain structure and should be able to mean something at least for the native speaker. A correct internal structure should make the sentence grammatical and acceptable meaning should make it semantic. A sentence has got different degrees of grammaticality just as it has varying degrees of being semantic. This depends on the degree of language competence on the part of the speaker and on the social milieu where the language is spoken. For instance, a sentence like 'I ain't got nothing' could be said to be grammatical in some social environments but not in others. In the same manner, a sequence like, 'I beheld the weeping trees that hid behind the friendly rocks', could be quite semantic for some enlightened poet. It is the level of grammaticality and that of semanticism which together determine whether a sentence is acceptable in a language or not, that is: a sentence must have both an acceptable structure and an acceptable meaning.


Instruction: Explain the following grammar rule in Runyoro/Rutooro: Sentence in Runyakitara

Response: If determining what a sentence is, at least in European languages, may not be very easy, it seems to be even harder for Bantu languages such as Runyakitara. Bantu languages are normally classified as agglutinative languages or at least that they tend towards agglutination. This means that these languages have a tendency in sentence formation of having a central element, usually a root, to which several affixes (prefixes, infixes and suffixes) are attached as bound morphemes. The result is often a full sentence made up of what appears in normal circumstances to be one word. This process is mostly attested in cases of pronominalisation. Compare, for instance, the following two sentences in Runyoro-Rutooro: a−ba−anaba−ngeba−li−ire a−ba−anaba−ngeba−li−ire iv cl RT cl pr cl RT pf the children may have eaten. e-bi-tooke o-mu sahaani za-itu iv pr RT iv iv cl RT cl pr the banana in the plates our My children have eaten the bananas in our plates. This fairly long sentence can be pronominalized as follows: ba-bi - ri - ri - ire - mu They have eaten them there. cl cl RT Ext pf loc subj. obj. they them eat in One can note that although the process of pronominalisation has also occurred in the English translation, the latter has five words while the former has one (that is, babiriiriremu). Apart from the above special characteristic in determining the Runyakitara (or Bantu) sentences, the above points risen for the sentence in general can also be applied to the Runyakitara sentence. For instance, a sentence in Runyakitara can also be made up of a simple word - morpheme such as: Ego (yes), just as it can be made up of a full paragraph.


Instruction: Explain the following grammar rule in Runyoro/Rutooro: The Basic Components of a Runyakitara Sentence

Response: Just as in many other languages, in Runyakitara, the sentence is normally made up of at least a noun and a verb. For example: Omwana akazaana omupiira. The child played football. child played football The child played football. Note that in the above sentence the two indispensable elements are, Omwana akazaana (The child played). Although the noun omupiira is also important if we want to have all the basic information, its deletion is not as essential as if we deleted any of the other two words. Compare: [1] Omwana akazaana. [1] The child played. [2] Omwana omupiira. [2] The child football. [3] Akazaana omupiira. [3] He played football. The first sequence in [1] is quite acceptable although we are not told what the child played. The second sequence in [2] looks unacceptable. The third sequence is quite acceptable especially as the noun "Omwana" (child) reappears in the verb as pronoun as is usually the case in Bantu languages. Otherwise, if this pronominalisation did not take place, the sequence no. [3] would also be very wanting because of the lack of the noun subject. As things stand in Runyakitara, sequences [1] and [3] are quite acceptable while [2] is not. Generally speaking, the basic complete sentence would have the following components in Runyakitara: a subject and a predicate, or what could also be called a noun phrase and a verb phrase, as in the following sentence: omukazi akateera omwana. woman beat child The woman beat the child. In this sentence there are two basic components: Omukazi (Woman) the subject of a sentence and; akateera omwana (she beat the child); which may be called the predicate or the verb phrase. The verb phrase here is made up of two major elements, the verb and an object which is a noun (omwana - child). On a tree diagram such a sentence could be summarily represented as follows: In transformational grammar, such a sentence is arrived at after applying different transformational rules. As was said earlier, the above sentence can undergo some pronominalisation processes such that the whole sentence appears in one word usually called a verbal in Bantu linguistics: Examples: a (ka-mu-teer-a S/he beat him. she past obj. beat vf She beat him. Such a sentence can also be represented as follows on a tree diagram:).


Instruction: Explain the following grammar rule in Runyoro/Rutooro: 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] NP+V NP+V [2] NP+V+NP NP+V+NP [3] NP+V+Adj NP+V+Adj. [4] NP+V+PP NP+V+PP [5] NP+V+NP+PP NP+V+NP+PP [6] NP+V+NP+NP NP+V+NP+NP


Instruction: Explain the following grammar rule in Runyoro/Rutooro: 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: Examples: Assertive (or declarative).


Instruction: Explain the following grammar rule in Runyoro/Rutooro: Imperative

Response: The secondary modalities are: negative/affirmative passive/active Examples: emphatic (including exclamation).


Instruction: Explain the following grammar rule in Runyoro/Rutooro: 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. [a] Complete and incomplete sentences 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. What is a Complete Sentence? 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.  NP+V NP+V+PP 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 +V+NP+PP +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: Explain the following grammar rule in Runyoro/Rutooro: 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 VP+V+NP 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 N+V+PP N+V+PP. 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 NP+V+PP 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: Explain the following grammar rule in Runyoro/Rutooro: 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: Explain the following grammar rule in Runyoro/Rutooro: 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: Explain the following grammar rule in Runyoro/Rutooro: 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. Compounding and Embedding: Complex and Compound Sentences 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.


Instruction: Explain the following grammar rule in Runyoro/Rutooro: I like you but you don't like me

Response: 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: Explain the following grammar rule in Runyoro/Rutooro: 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:


Instruction: Explain the following grammar rule in Runyoro/Rutooro: We put the prepositions owa and

Response: 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: Explain the following grammar rule in Runyoro/Rutooro: 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: Explain the following grammar rule in Runyoro/Rutooro: 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: Explain the following grammar rule in Runyoro/Rutooro: NP1

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


Instruction: Explain the following grammar rule in Runyoro/Rutooro: 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: Explain the following grammar rule in Runyoro/Rutooro: 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: Explain the following grammar rule in Runyoro/Rutooro: 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: Explain the following grammar rule in Runyoro/Rutooro: 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: Explain the following grammar rule in Runyoro/Rutooro: 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: Explain the following grammar rule in Runyoro/Rutooro: 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: Explain the following grammar rule in Runyoro/Rutooro: 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: Explain the following grammar rule in Runyoro/Rutooro: 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:


Instruction: Explain the following grammar rule in Runyoro/Rutooro: One could argue that the real conjunction in Runyakitara is

Response: 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). Ndozire nti nookora kurungi. I have seen that you are working well. I have seen that your work is good.


Instruction: Explain the following grammar rule in Runyoro/Rutooro: 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 Examples: e (on by'omuhendo mukye 'of low price' makes the phrase become a relative clause. Compare:).


Instruction: Explain the following grammar rule in Runyoro/Rutooro: 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: Explain the following grammar rule in Runyoro/Rutooro: 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: Explain the following grammar rule in Runyoro/Rutooro: ASPECTS OF RUNYAKITARA SEMANTICS Celestino Oriikiriza

Response: What is Semantics? 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: Explain the following grammar rule in Runyoro/Rutooro: 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: Explain the following grammar rule in Runyoro/Rutooro: 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: Explain the following grammar rule in Runyoro/Rutooro: 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: Explain the following grammar rule in Runyoro/Rutooro: 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: Explain the following grammar rule in Runyoro/Rutooro: 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: Explain the following grammar rule in Runyoro/Rutooro: 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. Taylor (1985): Structured semantic fields (Taylor, 1985) (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. Examples: Rubongoya (1999).


Instruction: Explain the following grammar rule in Runyoro/Rutooro: 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 The list is a range of entities that exist. All sub-entities that fall under an entity have 'names'. Examples are shown in Table 5.3 under the column for objects. The names are the words in the vocabulary of a language. For instance, the term 'flower' is under 'plant' because a leaf is a plant object. The term 'house' is under material objects. This shows that what is in the language is also in the world, and most likely vice versa. Hence, the terms 'four' and 'tomorrow' come under quantity and temporal objects respectively. These kinds of divisions qualify to be the domains of words. The above are taken as the domains into which the mind divides up all things. Apart from the domains and the terms (words) under each of them, the situa-tion-role theory specifies that the entities referred to by the terms (words) are acted on, and the actions are spoken about. For example, 'a flower withers'. This is an action which is a result of force/conditions of nature. Seen from another example, a number is counted or added to another. It is possible that when actions take place, they are spoken about. Speech is in terms of sentences. Sentences follow the logical order of the action (depending on the language). For instance, the order of the event 'a flower withers', has the intrinsic structure 'something changes', which in speech (in English expression) is SV (Subject + Verb); that is, The flower withered or The flower has withered. Kiingi (2008a), Kiingi (2008b) and Kiingi (2009) posit the following roles that are played by entities. Table 5.4: Roles played by entities To view the above as actions, we can talk of 'changes', 'causations', 'nonchanges', etc. On the other hand, they can be considered as roles if seen against the background of the entities that perform them; for example, in 'The car is moving slowly', 'move (verb) denotes change in space. In 'The key opened the door', 'open' denotes causation (that is, the key causes the door to open). Based on the the situation-role theory, whose concepts are semantic categories and semantic-roles as listed and symbolised above, sentences can be symbolically formalised to show their semantic structure (thst is, pattern), as in the examples below. (The upper-case symbols are from Table 5.4 and the lower-case symbols are from Table 5.3). Sentence: He turned a traitor. Formalization (that is, semantic structure): Vh Gq Sentence: The ball hit me on the head. Formalization (that is, semantic structure): Zr Wh Rl The formalization above corresponds to the sentence structure SVC and SVOA respectively on a one-to-one correspondence. This correspondence is called syntaxsemantic isomorphism. The semantic situation-role theory has practical implications for lexicon (vocabulary) and dictionary making. In terms of lexicon, it is possible for one to choose to compile a lexicon (vocabulary) of a plant object, e.g. 'leaves'. It will not make sense to compile the terms of all leaves, but for a particular type of leaves, and in a particular way. For instance, in Runyakitara, it makes sense to compile the specific names of leaves of types of plants. Examples are ( Ry/Rk Ry/Rk ): amashansha (banana leaves) - amababi g'emitumba (leaves of a banana tuber) ebishuusha (pumpkin leaves) - amamabi g'ebihaaza/ebyozi (leaves of pumpkins) This kind of compilation is a called a subject dictionary, or a lexicon in general terms. For a defining dictionary, the semantic situation-role theory has the implication that meanings of words can be determined on the basis of the action that impacts on an entity. For instance, in 'The car is moving slowly' we know that 'to move' is to change in space relative to a location. For a 'car' in particular and other things which 'move', the definition of 'to move would be to go from one point to another'. A new meaning can also be sought if a different entity were the one undergoing the action (of the verb), e.g. 'The time is moving slowly'. In this case, 'move' means 'to complete a cycle'. It shows that if a different entity other than the normal entity performs the action, the implied meaning changes. This is an aspect of metaphoricity, and therefore meaning extension. How is this? 'move' as an example, is normally in relation to concrete objects if they change in space from one position to another. A non-concrete object such as time cannot be said to 'move' in this context. In cases where this verb is used to refer to time or any other non-concrete object, then the intended meaning is metaphorical (an extension of the basic meaning). Also, it is possible to use the semantic situation-role theory to write a systematic thesaurus. For instance, in terms of synonyms, the words 'price' (n.) and 'measure' (n.) may not belong to the same domain (that is, semantic category) of quantity objects if they are looked at from the perspective of their meaning. If 'price' is meant to mean 'value' it needs to belong to the abstract objects. But if it is meant to mean 'figure' (as in price tag), it needs to be put under quantity objects. Therefore, the specific meaning of words will be the basis of grouping words as synonyms under the different domains. This explains why 'price' and 'measure' may not be synonymous in certain cases. Indeed, it is the reason the two words are not direct synonyms of each other in the following list of synonyms recorded in Fergusson (1986, p. 323) demonstrated below. price, n. cost, expense, fee, rate, charge, value, worth, amount, figure, expenditure, outlay, valuation, assessment, estimate, quotation, bounty, reward. measure, n. size, magnitude, quantity, amount, extent, degree, scope, range. Using semantic categories to identify synonyms, it is justified to have the word endorero (Runyankore-Rukiga) being a synonym of ekifumuka (Runyankore-Rukiga) and vice versa. This can be judged from their meaning below as portrayed in Oriikiriza (2007, p. 161), whereby the meaning situates the words in the domain of material objects: endorero (n.) Akahengyere aku baabire bafumura omu kisiika ngu abakazi bareeberemu abagyenyi omu ... ibanga, ahabw'okuba bakaba bataikirizibwa kuzayo kubareeba nari kubahikaho. (A hole in one of the rooms in the house, which was used by women to see visitors. Women were not allowed to see visitors or come close to them.) Ekifumuka ky'orwigi eki baabaire bareeberamu enyamaishwa nari omuzigu aheeru nyekiro. (A hole in the door through which one observed an animal or enemy when it is outside at night.) According to the meanings above, the word endorero is a sub-set of ekifumuka. The latter includes the meaning of the former. Nonetheless, they depict entities that belong to the same domain, i.e. material object. Similarly, the Runyoro-Rutooro word enkamyo (n.) would belong to the domain of material object and plant. It is given in Ndoleriire et al. (2009, p. 44) with the following senses, which can be a justification for this: enkamyo (n.) (1) sour milk, (2) a plant used to turn milk sour. Clearly, in terms of semantic isomorphism of language, the semantic role-theory of language is reflective of situations that happen independent of language. It tells us of the phenomena (objects/entities) that exist in the real world independently outside language, but which are encoded in language (for purposes of communication). In the world of a Runyakitara speaker, there are objects/entities whose names have been illustrated through examples. The examples are, therefore, part of the vocabulary of Runyakitara. An attempt has been made to show how this vocabulary can be categorized systematically into ways in which the mind divides up all things. This has been done on the basis of the semantic situation-role theory. In the next section, emphasis now will be put on situations that take place and how they are encoded and expressed in language. The analysis will be based on the semantic situation-role theory (explained in the preceding section), with examples taken from English and Runyakitara. Situations, their Encoding and Expression in Language 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: