:: CIIL Grammars ::

Download Mao Naga Book

The personal pronominal system in Mao distinguishes three persons- first, second and third - and three numbers - singular, dual and plural. Gender is not distinguished in any number. First person has exclusive-inclusive categories in the dual and plural in the usual sense of the exclusive-inclusive distinction viz, the exclusion or inclusion of the speaker’s interlocutor. All the three pronouns have another exclusive-inclusive distinction in the plural which was broached in the section on Number. Plural pronouns are marked for exclusive plurality by ta and for inclusive plurality by -khru. ta marks the exclusive homogeneous part of an unidentified heterogeneous whole. Thus, ata iniu-li ‘in our (exclusive plurality) village’ refers necessarily to a single village to the exclusion of other villages whereas akhrumüi iniu - li ‘in our (inclusive plurality) villages’ necessarily means a plurality of village identities, a melange, for instance, of the villages of Punanamai, Pudunamai, Shong shong and Kalinamai. ata(müi) pfo would mean ‘our (excl. pl) father’ while akhrumüi pfo which would mean ‘our (incl. pl.) father’ is strikingly odd. It could only mean ‘our father (=god)’ ‘our’ denoting a larger, more inclusive set than the ‘our’ signalled by ata. ita, on the other hand, denotes inclusiveness on the listener exclusion/inclusion axis and exclusiveness on the exclusive part-inclusive whole axis so that ita iniu ‘our village(s)’ is ambiguous as to number. If what is meant is a single village, then the identity is village. If, on other hand, it means ‘our village’ then the group is bound by an identity other than village which it cuts across. The essential point is that ta indicates a singularity of identity, and a plurality of number which is homogeneous at some level of identity unlike -khru which signals plurality both of identity and number, a plurality which is heterogeneous at some level of identity. Both pfotamüi ‘they (excl. pl.) and pfokhrumüi ‘they (incl. pl)’ can be used to refer to the same referent, say, Indians as a whole, but NOT in the same frame of reference. pfotamüi would mean an exclusive subset of a larger set of nationality identities whereas pfokhrumüi would mean an inclusive mix of different intraset identities whatever they be. Conversely, pronominal forms with ta (ata(müi), for instance) could be used to refer to two different referents as in

395		ata	suu·ens	yu:nian
	and

396		ata	iniu

but in different frames of reference : ata su·ens yuunian ‘our students’ union’ denotes an identity viz. that of the students’ union in a larger identity ;

for example, the village whereas ata iniu denotes a subset of a different set, a village, for example, in a group of villages. We shall call a pronoun marked for the exclusive-inclusive distinction with respect to the speaker’s interlocutor exclusive or inclusive pronoun excl or incl prn for short, and a pronoun marked for the exclusive-inclusive distinction with respect to the (exclusive) part-(inclusive) whole relationship exclusive or inclusive plural or excl. or incl. pl, for short. An exclusive pronoun could be marked for inclusive plurality and an inclusive pronoun for exclusive plurality. akhrumüi ‘we (excl. prn. & incl. pl.)’ illustrates the former and ita (müi) ‘we(incl. prn. & excl. pl.) the latter. -khru typically also that the referents are all present at the place of the speech, act, unlike ta. Thus nikhrumüi ‘you (incl, pl.)’ would mean all its referents are present; it does not refer to anyone not present whereas nitamüi ‘you(excl.pl)’ could. For these two reasons viz. that it signals a large, inclusive set and that it typically indicates presence, pronouns with -khru are not very common. akhrumüi ‘we(excl. prn & incl. pl.), for instance, is statistically far less frequent than atamüi ‘we (excl. prn & excl. pl). Further, plural pronouns marked by ta, typically, carry a signification of disrespect, disgust or frivolity. ita (müi), for instance, is often light to the point of frivolity and not serious, dignified. The dignified counterparts of such pronouns (i.e. those marked by ta) are those marked by ta followed by -khru. Thus, itakhrumüi, in contrast with itamüi, has deep, dignified signification. Similarly, nitakhrumüi and pfotakhrumüi carry an overtone of respect unlike nitamüi by -müi, the former is more contumely. Thus pfota is more contumely than pfotamüi. However, atakhrumüi and atamüi do not contrast in terms of the emotional load elucidated above, atakhrumüi and atamüi being used in church services, prayers to god etc. Pronouns marked by ta also signify a class, a section of people, but a class larger than those marked by ta and smaller than those marked by -khru. Thus, itamüi typically signifies a smaller set than ilekhrumüi which in turn signifies a set smaller than ikhrumüi. Forms with l® are usually or typically spoken by elders. They may be translated into, English as ‘we people’ ‘you people’, ‘they people’, the appositive ‘people’ being taken to mean a class eg. workers, students, harlots, females, cultivators, carpenters, govt. servents. Note that there is no form like alekhrumüi, akhrumüi and i have the same signification except that the use of i does not imply the presence of the referents while that of akhrumüi does excepting special cases like akhrumüi pfo ‘our father (= god)’. Finally, nilēi®khrumüi composed of nilē ® ‘you people’ and khrumüi is an inclusive pronoun signifying inclusive plurality

Top

Mao Naga Index Page

FeedBack | Contact Us | Home