DÀ AND NKỌ́: A PREDICATIVE VIEW

LINGUISTIC SCHEMA: A CATALYST FOR IMPROVING JSS TWO STUDENTS PERFORMANCE IN READING FOR LITERAL COMPREHENSION IN ZARIA METROPOLIS 34 DÀ AND NKỌ : A PREDICATIVE VIEW BY OLABODE T. ABIMBOLA (PHD) [email protected] Department of Linguistics, African Languages and Communication Arts Lagos State University, Ojo, Lagos State, Nigeria. DOI : https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.17726771 Abstract In furtherance of the arguments advanced in Taiwo and Abimbola (2014) on “dà” and “ńkọ”, classified traditionally as verbs in Yorùbá grammar, this paper argues that “dà” and “ńkọ” are verbs against Awobuluyi’s (2013) and Olaogun and Asiwaju (2016) submissions. In Awobuluyi (2013), “dà” and “ńkọ” are viewed as a non-verbal items based on certain co-occurrence restriction imposed on them by Yorùbá short pronouns on the one hand. On the other hand, “dà” and “ńkọ” are said to share some similarities with certain functors like the focus marker among others. The two items were classified as wh-words by Olaogun and Asiwaju (2016). In this article however, eight arguments are advanced in favour of predicative reading of “dà” and “ńkọ” to further show that non-predicative interpretation of the two items is misleading. The properties shows that “dà” and “ńkọ” are verbs in Yorùbá and that Awobuluyi’s claim does not nullify them as verbs in clauses where they are used. It concludes that every lexical item has it peculiarities with which one may identify it as a member of a larger category, and may narrowly have some features which will set such apart from all the members of that category. Keywords: “dà” and “ńkọ”, predicative, non-predicative, verbs, Yorùbá. Vol 2, No 1 SEPTEMBER, 2023: Language Review: An International Journal of Linguistics (LRIJL) 35 INTRODUCTION Lexical items may be classified based on specific syntactic features defining a set of items as a class. Within a given class as well, it is not unlikely to see certain items with specific different features as opposed to general features for characterizing all the members as a class. And having a specific syntactic feature to the exclusion of others in the class does not limit such item’s functionality within the clause. This observation is evident in the following examples; 1a. John said that Kim will be here soon. 1b. John blocked the ridge. 1c. He asked if Kim knew the man. The italicized words in (1a-c) are verbs. These verbs have transitivity feature as shared commonality but have different peculiarities distinguishing them. And, the fact that ‘said’, ‘blocked’ and ‘asked’ have individual features excluding others do not undermine being included in the class of ‘transitive’ verbs. In the same vain, traditional Yoruba grammarians have a class of verb often donated as interrogative or question verb because verbs classified in this class are primarily used for asking questions. There are two types in standard Yoruba while there are different correlates in Yoruba dialects. This class reflects an aspect of Yoruba native speakers’ understanding of the way words are assigned meanings, functions or usage in actual sentences of the language. And it is the basic concern of linguists to describe the native speakers’ implicit knowledge of his language. However, whenever such description is contentious, careful investigations to establish the truth must be carried out. Hence, a native speaker knows when he is communicating and when his utterances are rendered in error. Similarly, Yoruba language speakers know that the following are acceptable sentences in the language: 2a) Ọlá ra ọkọ tuntun b) Ọkọ náà dà? c) Ọkọ náà ńkọ báyìí? Ola buy-NF car new Car Def. QV car Def. QV like this “Ola bought a new car” “Where is the car?” “where is the car now?” Yoruba language speakers know that there is a difference in the way (2a) is used and structured as opposed to the way (2b) and (2c) are used and structured. A lot has been said by Yoruba scholars on the ‘verbality’ of dà and ńkọ. Scholars like Abraham (1958), Awobuluyi (1978, 2008, and 2013), Bamgbose (1990), Taiwo and Abimbola (2014), Akanbi (2014) have said one thing or the other on these lexical items. Speakers would adjudge (2b) and (2c) as sentences, specifically as interrogative sentences. This view shall be referred to as predicative view. Other view, referred to as non-predicative view in this paper, assumes that dà and ńkọ in (2b) and (2c) above are not verbs based on their inability to co-occur with short pronouns while other predicative features are neglected (cf. Awobuluyi, 2013). By implication, sentences (2b) and (2c) are not sentences and they do not have any predicative element. Hence, the present paper is primarily concerned with sentences like (2b) and (2c) by investigating with the aim of establishing the predicative features of the two items. Extant works’ views were identified and critiqued and attention is given is to Awobuluyi (2013) non-predicative argument whose definition of verb in the language narrows down to only the items that can co-occur with short pronouns. After this, evidence will be advanced to further the claim that dà and ńkọ are verbs in the language. LINGUISTIC SCHEMA: A CATALYST FOR IMPROVING JSS TWO STUDENTS PERFORMANCE IN READING FOR LITERAL COMPREHENSION IN ZARIA METROPOLIS 36 Previous views on dà and ńkọ As far as the present writer knows, dà (and ńkọ) was first mentioned in Abraham (1958:121) dictionary. He noted that, “Dà “where is”? (the tone of the subject of this word does not rise, showing that this is not a true verb: v Tone rule) x àjẹ dà where is the paddle? Òun dà = òun ha dà = níbo ló dà where is he? (not òun dà) = ń-kọ 1 (v ibo).” This remark points to the nature of the item; thus, making it a suspect among verbs. Abraham’s view belongs to the class of non-predicative view of dà and ńkọ. However, he did not actually say that dà and ńkọ are not verbs. Consider the following; 3a) Olú dà/ńkọ b) Akin dà/ńkọ Olu QV Akin QV where is Olu?” “where is Akin/what about Akin?” c) Akín ra bàtà d) [Bàtà [tí Akín rà] dà/ńkọ] Akin buy:NF shoe [shoe [RelM Akin buy:NF QV] “Akin bought a pair of shoe” “where is the shoe that Akin bought?” Notice that on Olú which has high tone on its last syllable does not manifest tone raising on the subject as observed by Abraham in (3a). The same is true of Akin (3b), a mid-tone nominal subject on its last syllable. But in (3c) and (3d), the tone on Akin’s last syllable was raised. This raising was by no means triggered by the verb. It resulted from the merger Akin + ó =Akín, (cf. Awobuluyi, 1992 and other works). It should be noted however, that the event coded by the expressions in (2a-d) above are not in non-future. There are vast literatures available on the High Tone Syllable (HTS). Ogbeifun and Abimbola (2020) and Awobuluyi (2019) have suggested that ó denotes non-future tense in Úsẹn and Standard Yoruba respectively. This being the case, the cases expressed in (3a-d) above are in the time “now to infinity” when the actions will be completed and perfected, that is, point present to future infinity 1 . Hence, there is nothing to trigger the presence of high tone 1 from non-high. This suffices to say that the verbs are not responsible for high tone raising on the last syllable of the subject noun/nominal. By implication, the inability of a non-high resulting to a high tone in certain environments does not limit the ability of dà and ńkọ as verbs in Yoruba. Awobuluyi (1978) listed dà and ńkọ under a class of verb called ‘interrogative verb’. Invariably, he believes that dà and ńkọ are verbs because these two items predicate the clauses where they are used. Not only did 1 cf. Bull (1963) and Omamor (1982) among others. Vol 2, No 1 SEPTEMBER, 2023: Language Review: An International Journal of Linguistics (LRIJL) 37 Awobuluyi recognise dà and ńkọ as verbs, he specified their functions when he added that “this is the class of verbs used for asking questions”. There are only two of them, viz, 4a) Dà (where is?) b) Ńkọ (where is, how how about?) c) Owó dà (where is the money (for it)?) d) Èyí ńkọ (how about this one?) (Awobuluyi, 1978:62) In furtherance of his claim that dà and ńkọ are verbs, Awobuluyi (1978:123) says “among the verbs, dà and ńkọ occur in interrogative sentences only” 2 . Also, Awobuluyi (1978:48) noted that dà has subject as one of its verbal property when he said it can select subject because “every verb can be used with a noun” in subject position specifically. If dà and ńkọ select subject, then the two items should be regarded as verbs in the language because the two items are used predicatively. Non-predicative items cannot select nominal subject items just like every other verb in the language. However, these two items cannot select object and they cannot be used transitively. 3 Bamgbose (1990:149) listed dà and ńkọ as the only interrogative verbs in Yoruba as shown with example (9a). Wà, dà and ńkọ are the verbs he listed. 2 His observation defines the distribution of the verbs whose bound alternant is wà. “wà” is used only in declarative forms as in; 1a) * mo dà/ńkọ dáadáa 1b) Mo wà dáadáa 2a) Baba rẹ dà/ńkọ? 2b) Wọn wà ní ilé 1c) Pé mo wà dáadáa 1d) * ìwé tí mo bèèrè wà? 2c) *ó/wọn/a/ẹ dà/ńkọ 2d) Ó/wọn/a/ẹ wà e) Ìwé tí mo bèèrè dà/ńkọ? The examples above show the restriction of dà and ńkọ to interrogative sentences while wà “be/existence” is used only in declarative clauses. Noticed also that wà may select a relative construction as its subject. wà-clauses can be nominalised and used as subject of another verb as shown in (1c) above. Also, there is high tone raising which does not occur on subject of dà and ńkọ on the subject of wà as evident in (2b), a response to (2a). Sentences such as (2b) are natural responses to dà and ńkọ questions. Notice that wà can occur in places where dà and ńkọ cannot occur like co-occurring with short pronouns as in example (2d) where short pronoun is the subject of the verb. Contrastively, (2c) shows that short pronouns cannot function as subject of dà and ńkọ. Notice that the tone change rule on subject nominal was not licensed by wà as well. An element intervenes between the subject and the verb, yet, there is high tone on the subject of the clause as evident in (3a). Also, note that wà occurs after sì (see Abimbola (2015) for a detailed discussion on sì) which is denoting emphasis as in (4a) and (4b). However, when the subject nominal has a mid-tone, the tone of the item can be raised as in (4c) and (4d). But dà and ńkọ cannot be so used in declarative sentences. 3a) Wọn sì wà ní agbo eré náà o b) Wọn sì wà dáadáa c) Akín wà dáadáa d) wọn wà dáadáa e) *Akin wà dáadáa f) *wọn wà dáadáa 4) Adé ọhún wá dà/ńkọ (3a-d) shows that other items could precede dà/ńkọ. ọhún as used in the context above denote “specific” or “particular” Adé in question. Similarly, wá precedes dà/ńkọ. But that wá is different in meaning from wà. 3 See Taiwo and Abimbola (2014) for detail further discussion of some other features of Yoruba interrogative verbs. Bamgbose (1990) emphasised this property; that all verbs are not transitive and all intransitive verbs cannot be used transitively LINGUISTIC SCHEMA: A CATALYST FOR IMPROVING JSS TWO STUDENTS PERFORMANCE IN READING FOR LITERAL COMPREHENSION IN ZARIA METROPOLIS 38 9a) Ìwé dà/ńkọ 9b) Iṣẹ wà yàtọ sí *Iṣẹ wà nǹkankan 9c) Owó dà yàtọ sí *owó da nǹkankan Since dà and ńkọ are not transitive, exchanging object positions occupied by ìwà and ènìyàn in (10a-b) below is not a possible, (cf. Bamgbose, 1990:136-137). 10a) Wọn yí ìwà padà b) Adé bẹrù ènìyàn They turn behaviour back Ade fear people “they changed (their) behaviour” “Ade feared the people” Unlike the verbs yí...padà and bẹrù, dà (and ńkọ) cannot select object nouns or noun phrases. It has no cognate object like lá as in (11) where àlá kan is the object of lá as the only possible object that verb. On the tone rule which he alluded to, the tone on the item cannot rise because it is simply intransitive and cannot be so used transitively. It cannot behave as other transitive monosyllabic verbs in the language that changes a low tone to high before nominal object complement as shown in (12) below. 11) Mo lá àlá kan 12a) Rà: bàbà ra ẹran “Baba bought a ram” 1sg dream dream one b) Gbìn: àgbẹ gbin ata “the framer planted pepper” “I had a dream” c) Jà: wọn jà ní gbangba “they fought in the open” Notice that all the three verbs used above are monosyllabic low tone verbs. Tone change rule between the low tone verb and the object noun/noun phrases is noticeable between rà “buy” and ẹran “meat”, the object of the verb in (12a) and the same is true between gbìn “plant” and its object ata “pepper” its object complement in (12b) on the one hand. On the other hand, jà a low tone monosyllabic verb in (12c) does not induce such a change because it is not a transitive verb. Apart from this, the dà mentioned in “níbo ló dà” does not seems to have the same interpretation with the dà under discussion. That one seems to have a variant dì. 13a) Ó di ẹyìn oṣù mẹrin b) Ó di ìgbà–wo? HTS become back month four HTS become period-which “till after four month” “till when?” In essence, the fact that the tone on dà does not change has not changed it status nor make it a suspect. Whenever low tone monosyllabic transitive verbs and monosyllabic intransitive verbs in Yoruba take prepositional phrase complement, the tone will not change. Vol 2, No 1 SEPTEMBER, 2023: Language Review: An International Journal of Linguistics (LRIJL) 39 Akanbi (2014) also noted that dà and ńkọ are syntactically and semantically different. Syntactically, dà is used to ask questions about “where” while ńkọ asks questions about “where” and “how”. Semantically, Akanbi (2014:13) noted that dà and ńkọ “actually perform similar semantic role in one particular instance but also perform different semantic roles in some other cases”. Also, dà may be used sarcastically whereas ńkọ cannot be so used. Hence, he claimed that in certain instances ńkọ can mean “what about” which dà cannot denote.” He noted to dà and ńkọ as having two different properties: “question words” and “verbs”. This observation aligns with Taiwo and Abimbola (2014) that claims that the two interrogative verbs are verbs and at the same time functions as the question head in interrogative phrases. Akanbi emphasised that dà and ńkọ can only be used in-situ. That is, the two verbs are not a movement triggering or licensing items. This claim contradicts Taiwo and Abimbola’s (2014) view. They noted that the two verbs raise to the head of interrogative phrase on Head–to–Head adjunction for interrogative interpretation mapping on the clause in the left periphery. Akanbi also noted that dà and ńkọ require content statement as responses. This may have informed Olaogun and Asiwaju’s (2016) grouping of the item with kí, ta, èwo, among others. Due to the claim that assumes no-movement licensing for the two interrogatives, it was convenient for Akanbi to claim that dà and ńkọ are not subject to move alpha rule unlike wh-items. Akanbi’s view on the syntactic position of dà and ńkọ in the clause emphasises that the two items are verbs when he said that the two verbs occupy positions where intransitive verbs are found in the clause. This last point raised by Akanbi supported the claim earlier raised in favour no-argument object licensing raised above. It suffices to say that the two items are verbs contrary to non-predicative view. Taiwo and Abimbola (2014) have a different in approach to others because their position is taking from a minimalist point of view. Their argument that dà and ńkọ are verbs based on certain features: a) dà and ńkọ are intransitive and cannot be used transitively. Any attempt to use the two items transitively would result in non-existent constructions in the language. b) Co-occurrence with PP complement just as unaccusative verbs do. That is, dà and ńkọ may be followed by a preposition phrase. C) Inability of dà and ńkọ to cooccur with short pronouns. d) Sentences in which the two interrogative verbs are used are interrogatives and the two verbs are underlyingly marked as interrogatives. e) Dà and ńkọ are said to occur in complementary distribution with ta, kí, èwo, èló, among others which are nouns. Hence, they cannot be used the same way. f) Their clausal derivations are not like every other type of constructions. They assume that question feature on dà and ńkọ is weak. Hence, there is a need for movement of these items to the interrogative head while their subjects move to spec TP according to Ilori (2010) and Oduntan (2000). g) dà and ńkọ assign theme theta role to their subjects. They discuss reasons why the dà and ńkọ cannot be question marker rather they are to be considered as verbs: a) Replacement of argument structure, b) Inclusiveness condition c) Featureless valuation and d) Interfaces issues. These arguments are theoretically motivated. In Olaogun and Asiwaju (2016) the two items; dà and ńkọ were called wh-items becuase dà and ńkọ are interpreted as “where” in English. This view seems to be too narrow. And it is a wrong prediction of Yoruba native speakers’ intuition. Focus constructions are responses to wh-constructions in the language. As argued above, they cannot be so equated. It should be noted that sometimes languages do not have one-to-one lexical correspondence. Thus, a closely related item would be used to interpret the idea being conveyed. As a corollary to the aforementioned fact relating interrogative verbs with wh-words in the language, dà and LINGUISTIC SCHEMA: A CATALYST FOR IMPROVING JSS TWO STUDENTS PERFORMANCE IN READING FOR LITERAL COMPREHENSION IN ZARIA METROPOLIS 40 ńkọ 4 never select focus constructions as complement just as wh-questions do. For example, the italicized phrases are focused phrases headed by the focus marker ni in the language; 16a) Asín gé e ní imú jẹ b) Asín ni ó gé e ní imú jẹ Rat bite 2sg prep nouse eat Rat Foc 2sg bite Obj. prep nouse eat ‘The rat bit him/her on his/her nouse” ‘It was the rat that bit him/her on the nouse’ c) Kí ni Olú fẹ ṣe what Foc Olu want do “what does Olu want to do” 17a) Nígbà wo ni Fọlá fẹ padà sí Gánà? b) Ta ni a ó rán ní ọjá náà? Which time Foc Fola want return prep Ghana who Foc 1pl HTS send prep market “when will Fola return to Ghana?” “Who shall we send to the market?” In Yoruba, wh-items are usually displaced from clause-internal position to clause left periphery in the specifier of the interrogative clause/constructions. That is, Yoruba wh-items like kí, ta, èwo, etc, do not occupy head of InterP (interrogative phrase construction) because they are not the question marker but the item representing what is questioned in the clause 5 . Dà and ńkọ do not occupy the specInterP cartographically as evident in the fact that an item is selected for question force marking in the same clause containing dà and ńkọ. In standard Yoruba, and Kwa languages in general, the focus marker and question marker are said to compete for the same structure position 6 . Hence, focus articulation being the first articulated projection weeds out the overt realization of wh-interrogative marker. In furtherance of the already established differences between wh-items and dà and ńkọ, the following are to be noted in the behaviours of wh-tems in the Yoruba. That is kí, ta, èwo, etc are; (a) not functional words and not head of their projections; (b) 4 And by implication síkọ, the form of interrogative verb in central Yoruba dialects does not have focus construction as complement. e.g. Olú síkọ? 5 See Abimbola (2019) for a detailed discussion on distinguishing questioned items or the information the speaker seeks to know from the addressee and the question marker. 6 See Aboh (2007) for detail discussion, and Abimbola (2019a) for more on ‘questioned item’ and ‘question marker’. Vol 2, No 1 SEPTEMBER, 2023: Language Review: An International Journal of Linguistics (LRIJL) 41 trigger movement of constituents and create gaps through movement chains formed during fronting processes of the wh-items to the left periphery, (c) require overt focus licensing, (d) licensers of A-bar movement type, (e) interpreted with nominal binding rules, co-indexation, identical/identity reference. Contrary to Olaogun and Asiwaju’s claim, the argument above suffices to say that dà and ńkọ do not occupy the same positions as their wh-counterparts in Yoruba and they should not be equated. Awobuluyi (2013: 128) identifies features of verbs in Yoruba based on a number of tests and one of the features establishes dà and ńkọ as non-predicative items. These tests are discussed below; i. Coordination test is used for determining if an item is a constituent. That is, items that can be coordinated are constituents. In other words, if two items cannot be coordinated, then they are not constituents. The requirement of this test is that coordinated constituents (phrases, clauses and sentences) must be the same or equal in unit of grammatical description or must be in the same category syntactically. For examples: 18a) Ade àti bàbá rẹ lọ sí ìlú-òkè. b) Bàbá àgbà àti Ààrẹ jẹ ọré tímọtímọ. Ade conj father his go prep town-up baba elder conj president be friend close “Ade and his father went to the village “the older man and the president are close friends” c) Èmi pẹlú rẹ ni a ó ṣe iṣẹ náà. 1sgE conj him Foc 1pl HTS do work Def. “I, and him will do the job” The italicized phrases in the examples (18a-c) above are nominal items coordinated together with the use of “àti” and “pẹlú” which are nominal conjunctions. Yoruba has a limited number of conjunctions. Most conjunctions can be used with nouns and noun phrases as exemplified above. Similarly, sentences can be coordinated as shown in examples (19a-d). 19a) [S1Wọn jà] ṣùgbọn [S2 wọn ò kú] b) [S1 Mo ra aṣọ tuntun] àmọ [S1 n ò mú un dání] [They fought] but [they did not die] [I bought a new cloth] but [I did not come with it] c) [S1 wọn di ìbò], [S1 wọn sì borí] d) [S1 ọbọ ọba gé Bàbá jẹ], ṣùgbọn [S1 Bàbá ò kú] [they voted], they worn] [the king’s monkey bit the man] but [the man did not die] However, certain types of pronouns may not be used in the same way as the nouns of this language. Nouns can function anaphorically in Yoruba but verbs cannot be so used 7 . LINGUISTIC SCHEMA: A CATALYST FOR IMPROVING JSS TWO STUDENTS PERFORMANCE IN READING FOR LITERAL COMPREHENSION IN ZARIA METROPOLIS 42 20) Mo rí iṣu méje; mo jẹ méjì níbẹ. 1sg see yam seven; 1sg eat two there I saw seven yams, I ate two out of it” 21a) lọ àti jó yẹn ò dàra b) ọkanùn ni pẹlẹja àti pa ẹlẹja ní ìtumọ. ‘Go’ conj ‘dance’ that neg good same Foc pẹlẹja conj pa ẹlẹja prep meaning “the ‘go’ and ‘dance’ you wrote are not good” “both pẹlẹja and pa ẹlẹja are the same” Verbs and VPs cannot be coordinated with the use of conjunctions in Yoruba in the same way nominal constitunets are conjoined. If they are so used, then such verbs would turn to nouns functionally. Hence, the italicized verbs/verb phrases in (21a-b) are not acceptable as verb rather they are interpreted as nouns. Therefore being nouns functionally, they can be conjoined with nominal conjunctions in the language. ii. (verbal) Constituent Ellipsis: yet having grammatical sentences. According to Awobuluyi, only two types of verbs may partially undergo ellipsis in the clause. The first is jẹ which after been elided will be replaced by ni the focus marker. The second verb is ṣe which also has the meaning of jẹ. He illustrated with the following example: 22) Ọ gá ni mo jẹ níbẹ → Ọ gá ni níbẹ. Master Foc 1sg be there master Foc there First, it is pertinent to note that not all verbs in the language may be so used like this. The fact that a nonpredicative item replaces a predicate is rather mind-troubling. It thus seems that this claim draws back Yoruba studies to square one where the focus marker was considered as type of verb. Secondly, this process is only possible within focus constructions/structures because focus ‘acts’ in such constructions 8 as claimed by Awobuluyi (2013). Thirdly, a careful observation of the examples cited by Awobuluyi shows that it is not just the verb that undergoes ellipsis in (22) but a combination of the subject and the verb 9 . The English 7 See Abimbola (2019b). This observation has also noted in Awobuluyi (2020). 8 Cf. Yusuf (1992). Yusuf is one of those who see the focus marker in Yoruba as a copula verb. However, there are several indications pointing to a fact about language behaviour in examples like this. Language may have identical words seemingly occurring in similar environment. But whenever such are examined, one would observe that the items are functionally different. Interested readers may see Yusuf (1992) and some other researchers who share the view. Vol 2, No 1 SEPTEMBER, 2023: Language Review: An International Journal of Linguistics (LRIJL) 49 1sgE foc 1sg/HTS cont. greet Olu 3sgE foc HTS/3sg greet Olu I am the one greeting Olu “they are those who greeted Olu” Examples (38a-b) above can be used as the response to (39a) below whereas (39b) cannot be so used. Based on the argument above, dà/ńkọ cannot be classified as any other type of items other than verbs. 39a) Ta ni ó ń kí Olú? b) *Mo/wọn ni ó ń kí Olú. Who foc HTS cont. greet Olu “who is greeting Olu” v.) Evidence based on ṣé and ǹjẹ: Every sentence can be questioned with the use of ṣé/ǹjẹ and bí 13 . In the case of dà and ńkọ, once the sentence are nominalised and used as subject or object of the clause, dà/ńkọ –clause would become a subordinate clause. The derived clause can be questioned with ṣé/ǹjẹ. Consider the following examples: 40a) Olú lọ sí ìlú òkè “Olu went to the village” b) ṣé/ǹjẹ Olú lọ sí ìlú òkè? “Did Olu go to the village?” c) Pé Olú lọ sí ìlú òkè ni orin wọn “That Olu went to the village is their gossip” d) ṣé/ǹjẹ pé Olú lọ sí ìlú òkè ni orin wọn? “So, that Olu went to the village is their gossip” e) Àwọn akọrin náà dà/ńkọ? “Where are the choristers?” f) Pé Àwọn akọrin náà dà/ńkọ ni wọn wí “That where are the choristers was what they said” g) ṣé pé Àwọn akọrin náà dà/ńkọ ninu wọn? “So, that where are the choristers among them?” According to Awobuluyi (1978:79) ṣé and ǹjẹ are sentential adverbs attached only to sentences at the beginning of the clause to interrogate clause. Some other Yoruba scholars have used the term question marker. Apart from using ṣé and ǹjẹ, àṣẹ is another form of question marker which can be attached to clause to turn such clauses into interrogatives. Consider the following; 41a) Àṣẹ pé ó lọ kò dára. “So/ I did not know that he went is good” b) Àṣé pé wọn sọ pé Olú dà kò dára. “So/ I did not know that they said where is Olu is not good” c) Àṣé pé àwọn akọrin náà kọ láti béèrè pé àwọn ọmọ náà dà/ńkọ kò dára. “So/ I did not know that that those choristers refuse to ask that where are those children is not good” 13 The inclusion of bí in this class requires a deep reflection on the behaviour of the item. This is further discussed in a separate article under preparation. LINGUISTIC SCHEMA: A CATALYST FOR IMPROVING JSS TWO STUDENTS PERFORMANCE IN READING FOR LITERAL COMPREHENSION IN ZARIA METROPOLIS 50 “àṣé” has a different usage which differentiate from ṣé/ǹjẹ. It means narrowly “I did not know/realise that…” If this question marker can be used to interrogative any construction in the language then that construction in which dà and ńkọ are used is a sentence predicated by dà or ńkọ. vi) Evidence based on conjunctive argument: Usually, a constituent can be tested with the use of coordination. That is, if the constituent can be coordinated, with another constituent of similar features in terms of category, phrasal or sentential quality among other things, then the said item is a constituent. In essence, a verb/verb phrase can be coordinated with a verb/verb phrase; a noun/noun phrase with a noun/noun phrase; but not a verb with a noun/NP or an adjective. Similarly, a sentence can be coordinated with a sentence if the two are have equal syntactic features otherwise coordination cannot hold. In Yoruba language, there are certain elements which have the functions of connecting or coordinating items together in phrases, clauses or/and sentences. “pẹlú” and “àti” are nominal conjuctions. These tconjunctions cannot be used to conjoin non-nominal elements as evident in the following examples 42a) Lọlá àti Tọlá jẹ ọmọ wa b) Èmi àti Bàbá mi rin ìrinàjò kan c) Fọlá, Lọlá àti Tọlá fẹràn àbúrò wọn d) Ẹkùn pẹlú àmọtẹkùn kìí rìn rìn pọ c) Ọkọ àti ìyàwó ni wọn d) Èmi pẹlú wọn fẹ sọrọ kan e) Ìwọ pẹlú èmi ni wọn yàn f) The man and his wife want a good car The italicized phrases are nominal phrases in which the nominal conjunctions have been used. In this regard, the italicized structures are unequivocally: [N/NP conj(pẹlú/àti 14 ) N/NP]. Clauses and sentences may be conjoined with “sì”, “sùgbọn”, “yálà...tàbí” among others in the structure [S1 conj s2]; 43a) Fọlá lọ sí ìlú-òkè ṣùgbọn òun dà “Fola went the village but where is she?” b) Wọn ra ìlẹkẹ sùgbọn ìlẹkẹ ọún náà dà báyìí “they bought beads but where are the beads?” c) Bàbá fẹràn ìyàwó kékéré àmọ wọn kò fẹ wàhálà rẹ. “Baba loved the young wife but does not like her trouble” d) Ìyàwó mi ní ṣùgbọn àmọ òun náà ńkọ? “My wife has an issue but where is she exactly?” 14 “Òun” is another type often grouped with this class. It has been left out of this class following Ilori’s (2010) submission. Vol 2, No 1 SEPTEMBER, 2023: Language Review: An International Journal of Linguistics (LRIJL) 51 e) Yálà wọn sọ pé olú dà tàbí wọn ò sọ bẹẹ “whether he said where is Olu or not” If sentences containing dà and ńkọ can be conjoined just as other undisputable clauses and simple sentences with sentence conjunctions as the case is above, then such sentences are complete sentences and they have a predicator before being termed a sentence. vii) Referentiality argument: Every incomplete noun phrase is referentially dependent on previously mentioned noun phrase pragmatically/semantically. Such incomplete nouns as in example (50b-c) function anaphorically by depending on another item just like pronouns. 44a) Àwọn ọdẹ gé ẹran sísun náà sí wẹwẹ. “The hunter cut the roasted meat into small pieces” b) Ẹran sísun náà dà/ńkọ? “Where is that roasted meat?” b) Sísun dà/ńkọ? “Where is the roasted one? In examples (44b-c) sísun and ẹran síun náà are both used to refer to previously mentioned items in sequential clauses. Examples (44b) and (44c) may follow logically as a sequential clause to the (44a). Hence, the addressee does not need to ask which sísun or ẹran sísun náà the speaker is talking about. Just like every other verbs, nominal items before dà/ńkọ can be referentially dependent on another nominal expression which already being mentioned in discourse. viii) The last one is the evidence based on subject selection. No verb may be used in the language without either overt or covert nominal subjects. This was first noted by Awobuluyi (1978), as the following examples show. 45a) Bọlá àti Fọlá ra àwọn aṣọ aláràǹbarà ní ọjà gbági. “Bola and Fola bought some patterned clothes at Gbagi” b) Wọn ra àwọn aṣọ aláràǹbarà ní ọjà gbági. “They bought some patterned clothes at Gbgi market” c) Wọn rà wọn ní ọjà gbági. “They bought them at Gbagi market” d) Àwọn náà dà/ńkọ? “Where are they?” 46a) Bọlá àti Fọlá (náà) dà/ńkọ? “where exactly are Bola and Fola?” b) àwọn aṣọ aláràǹbarà náà dà? “where are the patterned clothes?” c) *wọn dà/ńkọ? LINGUISTIC SCHEMA: A CATALYST FOR IMPROVING JSS TWO STUDENTS PERFORMANCE IN READING FOR LITERAL COMPREHENSION IN ZARIA METROPOLIS 52 In examples (45a-d), all the subjects are italicized. In (45a-c), the subject occurred in unemphatic subject position of the clause which enables the use of unemphatic pronouns to replace the subject accurately and grammatically in (45b-c). That is the position where the short unemphatic pronoun can be used. In (45d), the subject is an emphatic pronoun because of the interrogation placed on it. That suggests that movement has taken place i . And also a fact that the subject item occupies a new position i.e. a non-argument movement position termed Āposition in theoretical syntax. That position does not just allow any other type of pronoun except emphatic pronoun hence, the ungrammaticality of (46c). Invariably, dà and ńkọ select nominal subject just like every other type of verb in the language. The presence of the item “náà” intensifies and emphasises the subject unlike the subject of dà and ńkọ, unlike other non-interrogative verbs in the language ii . Conclusion In summary, every syntactic category has peculiarities with wish lexical items belonging to a class can be identified. In the same vain, sub-subcategories’ lexical items can be identified narrowly as a member of a class as opposed to members of other class based on shared features. Lexical items may have individual notable peculiarities or features to the exclusion of items in its group that share certain number of commonalities unifying them together. If the two interrogative verbs do not behave as other verbs in the language, their syntactic properties have defined them as a class with distinctive features for characterizing them and it does no limit their predicative properties. This paper critiqued exiting works on the two interrogative verbs in Yoruba. It views all the existing claims under two categories: predicative and nonpredicative views. However, the paper emphasises that the two interrogative verbs are verbs in the language based on the new evidence advanced in support of predicative view. According to Bamgbose (1990), dà/ńkọ consists of features which make it more than just a verb. Hence, they have interrogative property unlike most verbs in the language. Pre-verbs may not occur before dà/ńkọ indiscriminately as argued by the paper. dà/ńkọ does not occur in verb serialization because it has specific function which other verbs do not have. This suffices to say that dà and ńkọ are best classified as verbs based on their predicative functions. Ignoring all these facts about the syntactic behaviour of the two interrogative verbs is tantamount to saying that the verbs do not exist at all in the language. Unless these items are not actually performing these predicative functions discussed as evidence in support of predicative interpretation and function in the Yoruba clauses, then, other interpretations may be appropriate. References Abimbola, O. (2017). The status of sì in Yoruba. Journal of Language and Education, 3(1), 58– 66. https://doi.org/10.17323/2411-7390-2017-3-1-58-66 Abimbola, O. T. (2014). The Ìyínnọ clause structure (Unpublished master's thesis). Department of Linguistics and African Languages, University of Ibadan, Ibadan. Abimbola, O. T. (2019a). Focusing in the information structural categories of Aika, Akoko area Vol 2, No 1 SEPTEMBER, 2023: Language Review: An International Journal of Linguistics (LRIJL) 53 (Unpublished doctoral thesis). Department of Linguistics and African Languages, University of Ibadan, Ibadan. Abimbola, O. T. (2019b). Issues in the syntax of Yoruba (Paper presented on June 15). Aboh, E. O. (2007). Focused versus non-focused wh-phrases. In E. O. Aboh, K. Hartmann, & M. Zribi-Hertz (Eds.), Focus and grammar: The contributions of African languages (pp. xx–xx). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Abraham, R. C. (1958). Dictionary of modern Yoruba. London: University of London Press Ltd. Akanbi, T. A. (2014). The syntax and semantics of interrogative markers ‘dà’ and ‘ńkọ’ in Yoruba. Retrieved October 2, 2019. (URL not provided; please include if available) Arokoyo, B. E. (2013). Unlocking focus constructions. Ilorin: Chridamel Publishing House. Awobuluyi, O. (1978). Essentials of Yoruba grammar. Ibadan: University Press Limited. Awobuluyi, O. (1992). Aspects of the contemporary Standard Yoruba in dialectological perspective. In A. Isola (Ed.), New findings in Yoruba studies (pp. 1–79). Ibadan: Odunjo Memorial Lecture Organising Committee. Awobuluyi, O. (2013). Ẹ kọ gírámà èdè Yorùbá. Osogbo: Atman Limited. Awobuluyi, O. (2019). Converted nouns (Paper presented at Staff Seminar, Linguistics and Yoruba Unit, Department of Linguistics, African and European Languages, Kwara State University, Molete). Awobuluyi, O. (2020). Talking points for January 2020 seminar (Paper presented at Staff Seminar, Linguistics and Yoruba Unit, Department of Linguistics, African and European Languages, Kwara State University, Molete). Bamgbose, A. (1990). Fonọlọjì àti gírámà Yorùbá. Ibadan: University Press Plc. Bull, W. E. (1963). Time, tense and the verb. Berkeley: University of California Press. Ilori, J. F. (2010). Nominal constructions in Igálà and Yorùbá (Unpublished doctoral thesis). Department of Linguistics and Languages, Adekunle Ajasin University, Akungba-Akoko. Odetokun, A. (2005). Kókó èdè àti gírámà Yorùbá. Ilorin: Haytee Press and Publishing Co. Oduntan, (2000). Yoruba clause structure (Unpublished doctoral thesis). University of Iowa, USA. LINGUISTIC SCHEMA: A CATALYST FOR IMPROVING JSS TWO STUDENTS PERFORMANCE IN READING FOR LITERAL COMPREHENSION IN ZARIA METROPOLIS 54 Olaogun, & Asiwaju. (2016). Ọ rọ-orúkọ aṣèbéèrè nínú èdè Yorùbá. Paper presented at the 2016 YSAN Conference, University of Lagos, Akoka. Omamor, A. (1982). Tense and aspect in Iṣẹkiri. Journal of West African Languages, 12(2), 95– 192. Taiwo, O., & Abimbola, O. (2014). On the two interrogative verbs in Yoruba. Research in African Languages and Linguistics, 13, 1–14. Yusuf, O. (1992). Syntactic analysis: A student’s guide. Ilorin: Unilorin Press. Yusuf, O. (1997). Transformational generative grammar: An introduction. Ijebu-Ode: Shebiotimo Publications. i See Taiwo and Abimbola (2014). They argued that the subject position of dà and ńkọ occupies specifier position of the interrogative verb which was moved from the subject of the clause to the specifier of interrogative phrase for question to be mapped on it by the interrogative head. It was also argued in the work that dà and ńkọ had moved to the head of interrogative phrase for lexicalisation. ii See Ajiboye (2019) for a detail discussion on the functions of “náà”. List of abbreviations NF – non-future tense Defdefinite QVquestion verb RelMrelative marker HTShigh tone syllable 2sgsecond person singular pronoun Prep.- preposition Obj.- object noun phrase 1pl/1sgfirst person plural/singular pronoun 3sgEthird person singular pronoun emphatic Conj. - conjunction