The Swahili Relative Marker: reanalysis as a second-position clitic
Swahili is often analyzed as having three relativization patterns, illustrated in (1). I argue that there is only
one type; all three have the same basic structure. I follow Barrett-Keach (1985) in analyzing -cho as a
relative pronoun. The three central claims of my analysis are: (a) the relative pronoun is a second-position
clitic; (b) amba is an optional complementizer; and (c) a single morphological verb in Swahili may
constitute two phonological words. Crucial evidence for the third claim comes from stress placement data
described by Barrett-Keach (1985).
(1) a. kitabu
amba-cho
ni-li-ki-som-a
CL7.book
COMP-CL7.REL 1SG.SA-PAST-CL7.OA-read-MOOD
‘the book which I read’
b. kitabu
ni-li-cho-ki-som-a
CL7.book
1SG.SA-PAST-REL-CL7.OA-read-MOOD
‘the book which I read’
c. kitabu
ni-ki-som-a-cho
CL7.book
1SG.SA-CL7.OA-read-REL
‘the book I read’
Vitale (1981) describes (1a-c) as three separate constructions. Under his analysis, (a) contains a relative
pronoun (amba) with the attached suffix (-cho) indicating agreement with the head noun. He posits affix
hopping rules to account for (b) and (c). In the absence of amba (b) an identical agreement marker (cho-)
is prefixed to the verb between the tense and object markers. In tenseless relative clauses (c), the
agreement is suffixed to the verb stem.
Similarly, Barrett-Keach (1985) says that "there are three strategies for forming relatives in Swahili.”
However, she treats amba as an optional complementizer and cho as a clitic relative pronoun. She says
that these three strategies are “differentiated by, among other things, where the relative pronoun occurs in
the clause" (1985:26). This suggests that all constructions employ a single relativization strategy, namely
the relative pronoun strategy.
Several tests show that the Swahili relative pronoun is a second-position clitic, rather than an affix,
including the promiscuous attachment test. Certain tense prefixes may host the relative pronoun in clauses
such as (1b). According to Barrett-Keach these “relative tenses” include li- ‘PAST’, na- ‘PRES’, ta- ‘FUT’
and si- ‘PAST/PRES/FUT.NEG’. Stress patterns provide evidence that justify treating these tense prefixes as
potential hosts for the clitic. Primary stress is penultimate; secondary stress on verbs appears to
correspond to penultimate stress on the sub-constituent of the word containing the tense and subject
agreement prefixes. This fact motivates treating these prefixes as a separate prosodic word.
In (1b),
‘I read it’ becomes
cho
‘the one I read’; stress shifts to accommodate
penultimate stress on the tense constituent (
‘1SG.SA-PAST’ becomes
cho ‘1SG.SA-PAST=REL’). This
same pattern of stress shifts is seen when the relative pronoun attaches to other constituents, such as the
complementizer ( mba ‘COMP’ becomes
cho ‘COMP-CL7.REL’) in (1a). Likewise, the verb stem in
(1c) shows -Ø‘I read it (tenseless)’ becoming -Øcho ‘the one I read’. Penultimate
stress is maintained on the verbal constituent
cho while secondary stress remains on ‘1SG.SA’,the sole member of the tense constituent, even though tense itself is absent.
I analyze the verb form in (1b) as two phonological words ( +
), with the 2P clitic relative
pronoun attaching to the first of these, i.e. the tense prefix. An alternative analysis, by parsing the
morphological verb into binary feet, does not predict the correct results. By calling the relative pronoun a
second-position clitic, we can eliminate the need for special syntactic rules of clitic placement, like those
proposed by Barrett-Keach.