| anu |
`child’ |
anunoqo1 |
`children’ |
| akuhu |
`black
monkey’ |
akuhuqó |
`black
monkeys’ |
| acö |
`dog’ |
ac qó |
`dogs’ |
| aki |
`house’ |
akģqó |
`houses’ |
| asbo |
`tree’ |
asboqó |
`trees’ |
| axamnu |
`flower’ |
axamnuqó |
`flowers’ |
|
|
| In
the case of anu `child’, in addition to the regular plural marker
qó, it is also taken as an alternative plural marker, as in : |
| anu |
`child’ |
anunoqó~ |
anuli |
`children’ |
|
|
| And
the word axamnu `flower’ usually does not take the plural marker,
as in : |
|
| It
was already mentioned that the plurality is the property of the noun
phrase and as such when any sub-class of adjectives post-modifies
the noun head in the plural, the plural marker would be shifted and
post posed to the modifying adjective, as in: |
| apśqó |
`boys’ |
apś
kiwiqó |
`good
boys’ |
| kakuqó |
`books’ |
kaku
kiwiqó |
`good
books’ |
| apś
tipaw |
`that
boy’ |
apś
tipaqó |
`those
boys’ |
| apś
kiwi tipaqó |
`those
good boys’ |
etc. |
|
|
|
| A
noun that usually takes the plural marker may not take the plural
marker, when (i) a numeral or a quantitative adjective modifies it
or (ii) when the context clearly indicates the plurality; this would
apply even to all the noun phrases having a numeral or quantitative
adjective as a constituent, for instance, |
| (a) |
apu
kini |
`two
father’s’ |
| |
apu
kutomo |
`many
fathers’ |
| |
kaku
kiwi kini |
`two
good books’ |
| |
apu
kiwi kutomo |
`many
good fathers’ etc. |
| (b) |
pukhu |
`foot’ |
| |
panó´ś
pukhu |
`their
feet’ |
| |
iu |
`my
hand’ iuqó `my hands’ |
| |
ni´śu |
`our
hands’ |
|
|
| In
the two sets of illustrative examples given above, the singular forms
pukhu `foot’ and au `hand’, rather than the corresponding plural forms
occur with the pronouns in the plural, viz; panó´ł `they’ and ni´ł
`we’. This is possible because the context clearly indicates that
pukhu `foot’ and au `hand’ occurring respectively with pan´ł `they’
and ni´ł `we’ must necessarily be in the plural. |
| (ii)
Pronouns |
| Of
the different sub-types of pronouns, only the personal pronouns show
a three-way opposition in number, viz., a singular referring to one
person / object, a dual referring to two persons and a plural referring
to three or more persons. While the singular is left unmarked, the
dual and plural are marked separately. The three-way opposition in
number is available with all the three personal pronouns, as in :
|
| |
`I’ |
`you’ |
`he’ |
`she’ |
`it’ |
| singular |
ni |
no |
pa |
li |
hi |
| dual |
nikuzo |
nokuzo |
pama |
pama |
.
. |
| plural |
ni ł |
noł |
panół |
panół |
.
. |
|
|
| The
examples given above show that while a three-way opposition in gender
is available with the third person pronoun in the singular, viz. masculine,
feminine and common gender (for the nouns non-human beings), in the
dual and in the plural, the opposition between the feminine and the
masculine is neutralized and a single form is available for substituting
the nouns referring to both the male and female beings. For instance,
pama can substitute a NP referring to either two males or two females
or a male and female being and similarly panó´ł substitutes a NP referring
to three or more persons of either sex in any combination. It is pertinent
to mention here that the plural marker is available with all sub-types
of nouns including nouns inanimate being class, but the III person
non-human being pronoun hi substitutes only, a noun non-human being
class in the singular. Therefore if a noun in this sub-type in the
plural is to be substituted, a demonstrative pronoun which shows singular/plural
opposition, rather than the III person pronoun is used, as in : |
| acqóno
akhosa Feha |
`the
dogs barked at the cat’ |
| hipaqóye
ackiwi |
`these
are good dogs’ |
| ac
hipaqóye kiwi |
`these
dogs are good’ |
|
|
