REPULIQUE DU SENEGAL

UNIVERSITE CHEIKH ANTA DIOP DE DAKAR

FACULTE DES LETTRES ET SCIENCES HUMAINES

(FLSH)
*******************************************
DEPARTEMENT D’ANGLAIS
*************************************************
RAPPORT DE RECHERCHE MASTER 1
OPTION : LINGUISTIQUE ET GRAMMAIRE
THEME

MORPHO-SYNTACTICAL CONTRASTIVE STUDY

ABOUT RECIPROCTY IN ENGLISH AND IN WOLOF

Présenté par : Sous la direction de :

Serigne Bassirou Mboup Dr Mbacké Diagne
né le 27/10/1994 a Koki Chargé de recherche
N° carte : 201305R6F
Email : [email protected]
Tel : 78-123-29-65

Année universitaire
2016-2017 0
 OUTLINE

1. Context and Justification (p2)

2. Statement of the study
2.1 Position of the problem (p3)
2.2 Theoretical framework (p4)
2.3 Conceptual framework (P4-7)
2.4 Questioning (p7)
2.5 Literature Review/Critical Literature Review(p7-10)
2.6 Research questions (p10)
3. Hypotheses and Objectives
3.1 Hypotheses (p10-11)
3.2 Objectives (p11)
4. Methodological Approach
4.1 Documentation(p11-12)
4.2 Corpus building
4.2.1 Data collecting (p12)
4.2.2 Data treatment (p12-13)
5. Provisional Plan (p13)
6. Time management (p13-14)
7. Bibliographical references (p14-15)

1
 1. Context and justification

Senegal is a country with different local and foreign languages.In Senegal, most of literate
people are fluent in foreign language and often understand the functioning of each language.
Meanwhile, those people have problems when it comes to the grammar rules of their own
local languages, native languages.To say, belonging to the Wolof community does not mean
that we master its language.

I have decided to do a contrastive analysis about the way in which English and Wolof express
reciprocal actions for many reasons.

As a native speaker, I have always had the eager to understand much better if not perfectly my
mother tongue which is also the only local language that I can speak fluently. Due to the fact
I’m studying in English, I unfortunately never questioned previously about the way Wolof
functions. Therefore, when the chance to do research on a topic of my choice came, I have
thought of focusing in Wolof and English. I have found it very interesting to try to find the
similarities and differences Wolof has with English, a language that I have been learning for
eleven years at least.I feel excited about going to this research and come up with so much
knowledge.

Being born Wolof and raised in a Wolof community, it is obvious that people would see me
as someone knowing so much about the language. After this research, I am to be clarify many
things related to my native speech which is also considered as Senegal’s national language.

Moreover, Iapprove that the notion of reciprocity plays a key role in every society.As
Gouldner(1960,172)said: “Reciprocity promotes the stability of a social system”.To say that
every culture is built on social exchange. Reciprocity is talked about in many different areas
such Philosophy, Biology, Social sciences, etc. In other words, it lies at the heart of a human
social life.For example, when we love or admire someone, we also want that person to love or
admire us back; when we give, we want to receive as well even though what we give might be
different from what we receive, and so on. That is the reason why I want to look at the way in
which it is expressed in both English and Wolof languages.

I truly believe that it could be a great help for researchers and people interested in Wolof,
English and Reciprocity, nowadays and in the future.

2
 2. Statement of the study
2.1 Position of the problem

Generally defined as a scientific study of human vocal language, Linguistics can be divided
into different areas of studies such as sociolinguistics, structural linguistics, descriptive or
contrastive linguistics, psychological linguistics among others.

In fact, I intend to work on two different languages in terms of the way they express mutual
actions.To say, this work focuses on a contrastive study of reciprocity between English and
Wolof. However, we admit that it won’t be as easy as we might think seeing that the two
languages do not share the same background.

Speaking of English, it is classified as a Low West Germanic language into the family of
Indo-European languages. It belongs to a big family where we can find other languages such
as French, German, Spanish, Italian, etc. Meanwhile, Wolof belongs to the Niger-Congo
phylum. It is classified among Atlantic languages, especially in the Northern Atlantic group
with other languages such as Pulaar, Sereer, Tenda, Biafada, etc.

In my research, I will try to bring light on whether English and Wolof share the same way of
expressing reciprocity or not. In doing so, I will emphasis the similarities that both languages
share in common as well as the differences they have.

In fact, descriptive analysis is compulsory in this work. In order to compare languages, we

have to know their structures first. A descriptive analysis requires different proceedings, data
collecting, data selection or classification, data analysis, data interpretation.

The notion of reciprocity rimes with an enormous semantic complexity such as plurality of
participants, symmetry, double (thematic) roles of arguments, joint action, etc. In other words,
reciprocity is broader than we may think and it can be expressed using different grammatical
points. However, we can see that it can also be a little bit similar sometimes to other voices
like reflexivity.

3
2.2 Theoretical framework

As it happens in other sciences, linguists also do not always share the same points of view as
far as their theoretical principles are concerned. That is to say, they sometimes differ in terms
of their methods, strategies, and proceedings.

In this case, seeing that my work is about descriptive grammar of two languages, I will base
my analysis on the functionalist approach. This approach is interested in the grammatical
function of every single unit that is used to build a sentence. In this context, I must find a list
of pairs of words, minimal pairs (pairs of words in which there is one only sound) of which
the two sounds are closely related in terms of phonetics features.

2.3 Conceptual framework

Linguistics is a science where the understanding and the interpretation of each technical term
vary from one researcher to another. Therefore, I find it very necessary to define the key
concepts that compose the study of the object that I am focusing (reciprocity).

Contrastive study: also known as contrastive analysis, a contrastive study can be defined as a
systematic study of similarities and differences in the structure and the use of two or more
language varieties, carried out for theoretical and practical purposes.Nasrin Abdiurges:
“Contrastive Analysis means the comparison of two languages by paying attention to
differences and similarities between languages being compared. It was first suggested by
Whorf (1941) as contrastive linguistics, a comparative study which emphasizes on linguistic
differences.” Thus, the description has to be scientific and both languages are to be described
in the same way.

Reciprocity:Reciprocity or reciprocal voice is a way of expressing two entities or more doing

the same action and each entity act upon the other or others entities and vice versa. According
to the dictionary Merriam-Webster, reciprocity is “a situation or relationship in which two
people or groups agree to do something similar for each other, to allow each other to have
the same rights, etc. : a reciprocal arrangement or relationship”.

 Example 1: “Mary and John love each other.”

Here,both Mary and John are at the same time the agent and the patient of the love. In other
words, Mary loves and she is also loved. Meanwhile, John loves and is also loved.

4
  Example 2: “The ten prisoners were all blaming one another.”

Here, each of the ten prisoners assumes the two semantic roles of agent and patient of the
blaming. Unlike the first example, we notice that the fact of blaming does not come from two
prisoners but more than two. Thus, the reciprocal pronoun “one another” is used.

Reciprocity comprises the idea of symmetry, plurality, double thematic role, morphology,
syntax, semantics, and so on. Therefore, it is indispensable to try to explain the meaning of
these technical terms.

Symmetry: expressed by predicate (different degrees of saturation), we talk about Symmetry

when there is centrality of the dual situation. In other word, it requires two reciprocants. We
can take the example of the following verbs: face to face, side by side, hand in hand, etc.

We can also give other examples such as: They are the same age/height.

They are similar/different/parallel.

Plurality:Reciprocity is always expressed by at least two entities. That comes to grip with
what Ekkehard König & Anneliese Kuhlecall “plurality of arguments/participants (⎢A ⎢≥ 2);
dual as prototype”. Thus, unlike Reflexivity, Reciprocity can’t be expressed by one entity
only.

Double thematic role: in Reciprocity, all the entities assume the role of agent and patient at
the same time. For example: “Peter and Paul greeted each other”. Here, both Peter and Paul
are agent and patient of the predicate.

Morphology: coming from the Greek word “Moorphé” meaning formand “ology” meaning
the science of, Morphology is the scientific study of the internal structure of words; the
identification of all the smallest linguistic meaningful pieces, the minimal meaningful units
with a grammatical function. Those units or pieces are called morphemes.A morph (meaning
form) is a phonological realization of a morpheme. For example:s, plural marker in English
can sound like z in boys; s in cats; iz in roses.

When dividing a word into basic units, we can identify two types of morphemes: lexical and
grammatical. A lexical morpheme is the stem (it can be simple or complex) of the word. It is a
type of morpheme which bears the meaning of the word in which all the other words of the
same family are built up.

5
A grammatical morpheme can be attached to the stem or the root to form new words of the
same or different grammatical category. We can take the example of affixes (prefixes; infixes;
suffixes; circumfixes). Affixes can be bound or free and seeing that they build new words,
derive new words, they are called derivational morphemes.

A derivational morpheme is different from an inflectional morphemeas the latter change the
category of the word. For example: the plural marker s.

Syntax: Syntax is a linguistic study of phrase and sentence structures and the rules by which
they are combined. It comes from the Greek word“syntaxis” from“suntassein” to “suntatten”
which meansto arrange together, and from sun to“tassein” meaning to arrange. In his book
named Neat Summary of Linguistics, RAYMOND HICKEY urges that “Syntax concerns the
possible arrangements of words in a language. The basic unit is the sentence which minimally
consists of a main clause (containing at least a subject and verb)”.Therefore, we can say that
Syntax is the study of different units that are used to build a sentence.Thus, it is also looking
for the structure sentences

Sentence structure is normally displayed by means of a tree diagram (the so-called ‘phrase
structure’) and by a system of re-write rules one can move from an initial unit (the entire
sentence) to the individual elements (a so-called ‘terminal string’).

It responds to how words are combined to form grammatical sentences and phrases of a
language. By doing so, the linguist can use generative grammar and/or relational grammar.
These two different approaches respectively focus on the rules that generates the sentences
and the grammatical agreement of the different units of the sentence.

Semantics:Semantics is concerned with the study of meaning and is related to both

philosophy and logic. The dictionary,Le GrandRobert define Semantics as: “the study of
meanings of all system of communication; especially of a natural language”.

Speaking of meaning, we can say without any doubt that there are four recognizable types:
lexical meaning, grammatical meaning, sentence meaning and utterance meaning which refer
to the areas of derivational morphology, inflectional morphology, syntax and pragmatics
respectively.

There are also what we call external meaning relationships and internal meaning relationships.
The first one involves sense (relationships between words) and denotation (relationship of

6
word to what it signifies). Meanwhile, the other one involve synonymy (sameness of
meaning), antonymy (difference in meaning), hyponymy (hierarchical order of meaning), etc.

Different models for semantic analysis are available: prototype theory, where a central
concept is taken as typical and less central ones are peripheral, and componential analysis
which seeks to break words down into their component semantic parts.

2.4.Questioning

It obvious that every science starts with observation and questioning, which will lead to a
theory which might become a law if approved. Therefore, in order to lead my research
successfully, I must ask the right question which I will try to find the answer. Thus, here is my
questioning:

 Question 1:Does reciprocity exist in both English and Wolof? In other words,
is there any way of expressing mutual action in both languages?
 Question 2: If so, then do both languages (English and Wolof) have the same
perception concerning the notion of reciprocity, seeing that each language has
its own rules and way of functioning?
 Question 3: What are the ways of expressing reciprocity in both Wolof and
English languages?
 Question 4: When and how do we express those different ways in both Wolof
and English languages?

To cope rightfully with this study, I will try to give appropriate answers to these questions
raised above.

2.5.Literature Review/Critical Literature Review

Before going deeper into the topic, I would like to deal with books that I have read about
reciprocity. I remarked that authors differs in their perspectives.

7
In his book Reciprocity in Language: Cultural Concepts and Patterns of Encoding, Ekkehard
König says that “typical reciprocal constructions are constructions with transitive (bi-valent)
verbs whose subjects typically denote two and perhaps more participants involved in two
(thematic) roles in a fully symmetric situation, that of the Agent and that of the Patient, that of
the donor and that of the recipient, etc.” He repeat the same idea in Towards a Typology of
Reciprocity: Concepts and Patterns of Encodingby explaining essential semantic properties as
following:

 Plurality of arguments/participants (A ≥ 2);

 Double thematic role of all participants;
 Symmetry expressed by predicate;
 The relevant sentences express a symmetric relation, a joint action or plurality of
events depending on the lexical meaning of the predicate.

However, with the double thematic role, I think that his idea does not cover all the lexical
reciprocal verbs. In other words, verbs that naturally assume two entities doing the same
action (like meet, exchange, etc.). Let’s take the following example: “We met yesterday.”
Semantically speaking, this sentence is a reciprocal one. It can mean that A meets B and B
meets A at the same time. However, I cannot say that they both assume the role of agent and
patient at the same time. Therefore I share the opinion of Creissels who argues that “a
definition of reciprocity which requires that every member should assume the two semantic
roles of agent and patient would be too restrictive to be interestingly applied to the analysis of
linguistic phenomena”.

Speaking also about reciprocal concepts, I have to say that I agree with Asifa Majid, Nicholas
Evans, Alice Gaby and Stephen C. Levinson who stated inThe grammar of Exchange: A
comparative Study of Reciprocity Constructions Across Languages that “the concept of
reciprocity as expressed in various ways such through the structure of language: from lexicon
(“feast” “exchange’), to special morphology in some languages, to full-blown grammatical
constructions (e.g. “gave to each other,” “shook one another’s hands”).

Taking the case in Wolof, we can have the verb “waxtaane” which means “to discuss”. Unless
it is use to express reflexivity (ex: “mangi waxtaane ak sama bopp”), this verb require at least
two entities doing the discussion. For example: “Yenangi waxtaane”. You guys are talking to
each other. / “Mangi waxtaane ak sama baay”. I’m discussing (conversing) with my father.

8
However, I find it hard for it to perfectly work with some verbs that add a morpheme to
express reciprocity. When we take the case of the verb “xuloo”, meaning “to argue”, or
“jongante” which means “to compete”. Both are verbs that assume two entities doing the
same action at the same time. But, it would be quiet impossible to drop the suffix “oo” and
“ante”. If we drop them, we will end up having “xul” and “jong” which makes no sense.
Different from verbs like “door” “to beat”. Adding the suffix gives “doorante” “to fight” or
literally “to beat each other”.

Further in the article, Asifa Majid, Nicholas Evans, Alice Gaby and Stephen C. Levinson
affirmed that “many languages have their reciprocity constructions based on the nominal
model, like English each other”. Meanwhile, others “encode the same or similar concept by
means of a verbal affix”. Wolof takes the case of the latter. We can add the suffixes “ante”,
“oo” or “e”. For example: “door” “to beat” and “doorante” “to fight”;

“degg” “to hear” and “deggoo” “to get along”;

“gis” “to see” and “gise” “to meet”.

In Wolof, it is more common to express reciprocity using the suffix “-ante”, the
usage of the suffix “-oo” is somehow a bit limited.With the suffix “-e”, I give credit and agree
withDenis Creissels and Sylvie Nouguier-Voisin who stated in The verbal suffixes of Wolof
coding valency changes and the notion of co-participationthat “…this use of -e is not very
productive, and can be characterized as limited to the expression of natural reciprocal
events(i.e., two participant events in which the exchange of roles is not absolutely obligatory,
but nevertheless constitutes the normal situation),…” Adding to that,we also noticed, the “-e”
suffix expresses anti-passive as well in many cases. For example: “Saxar du xare”; “Xajj bi
dafay mate”

In a different vein, in Reciprocal Verbs and Symmetry Tal Siloni noted that reciprocal
constructions are often argued to split into two types:

 "Periphrastic reciprocal constructions" such as They kissed each other, where

reciprocity is expressed by means of a reciprocal anaphor (each other),

9
  Reciprocal constructions headed by a "lexical reciprocal verb" such as They kissed,
which describes a reciprocal situation without the aid of a reciprocal anaphor
(languages, unlike English, tend to mark such verbs morphologically).

Taking this case in Wolof, it is difficult to find the same verb that can either way add or drop
a suffix and still express reciprocity. However, we can have verbs that work well with two
different suffixes. For example the verb “xeex” which means “to fight”. We can add either
way both suffixes“-ante”and “-oo” like the case of “xeexante” which is mostly used in
transitive clauses and “xeexoo” which goes with intransitive clauses.

2.6. Research questions

After reading many books related to my topic, here are my questions:

 Does Wolof have its reciprocal constructions based on the verbal suffix only?
 What if we drop the suffix expressing reciprocity, would every verb still keep their
meaning?
 Does English have its reciprocal constructions only based on a nominal model, like
each other or one another?
 How many types of reciprocity can we have in English and in Wolof?
 Are the suffixes expressing reciprocity in Wolof always used in the same
environment?

3. Hypotheses and Objectives

3.1 Hypothesis

Hypotheses are a-priori responses to questioning. They are based upon the intuitive
experiences of the researcher. In other words, we can make hypotheses on the base of our
linguistics literature.

 Hypothesis 1: Reciprocity does exist in both English and Wolof;

 Hypothesis 2: English and Wolof do not have the same perception about the notion of
the reciprocity;

10
  Hypothesis 3: Morpho-syntactically speaking, English and Wolof have similarities and
differences when expressing reciprocity;
 Hypothesis 4: We can express reciprocity in both English and Wolof in many different
ways.
 Hypothesis 5: We can express reciprocity in Wolof based on verbal suffixes and based
on nominal suffixes in English.

3.2 Objectives

My main objectives is to check on or more precisely to find out the different similarities and
differences between English and Wolof about reciprocity. I will try to do so in a selective
proceeding.

In order to reach my main objective as stated above, I will subdivide it into different pieces.

 Firstly, I will look at the different morphological and syntactical transformations each
of the two languages undergo when expressing reciprocity;
 Secondly, I will look at the morphemes (suffixes) and reciprocal pronouns that are
used as well as when and how they are used;
 Thirdly, I will try to find the way each morpheme (suffix) is different from another
morpheme and which one is commonly or most likely used.
 Finally, I will try to see what works with each of the two languages what does not.

4.Methodological Approach

4.1. Documentation

A good documentation is definitely needed in order to succeed in any research we do. As I’m
working on English and Wolof, I will review some books related to both languages so that I
am aware of what has been done already. In trying to do so, I will need to visit places such as
CLAD (Centre de Linguistique Appliquée de Dakar) located in UCAD (Universite Cheikh
Anta Diop de Dakar), as well as BU (Bibliotheque Universitaire) and the English Library
called BD (Bibliotheque Departementale), IFAN (Institut Fondemental d’Afrique Noir).
These are among places where I think I will find relevant data, and also works done by others
Master student that did research before us. Adding to what I said above, I will also check

11
some the websites where I might found important and relevant books and documents. As we
all know, internet has become a tool so necessary for any scientific research.

4.2 Corpus building

4.2.1. Data collecting

A structural linguistics study of a language starts with a corpus analysis. Therefore, a corpus
is needed in this phase. A linguistic corpus is obtained through data collecting and linguistic
data are actual utterances produced by speakers of the target language. In other words, a
corpus is a collection of written or spoken language. With my research topic, the corpus will
be composed of two main parts.

The first one, which is concerned about Wolof, will be mostly obtained on the field. In doing
so, I will try to collect as many data as possible in different areas where the pure Wolof
language is spoken. I will need some tools such as a tape recorder and a questionnaire. As I
am from a village called Koki, where not only Wolof is mainly spoken as well as the most
dominant ethnic but I am quite familiar with some of the elders and most of the youngsters, it
(Koki) will be therefore my main target. On top of that, I will also try to find online books,
theses, or articles, etc. written about Wolof.

The second one, which is concerned about English, will be mostly obtained through reading
grammar and literary books, online researching, etc. I also will read some books written by
our teachers, as well as trying to interview (and tape recording them if they allow me to)
which eventually will be very useful to me to broadly understand my main domain of study
(Reciprocity).

4.2.1 Data treatment

Data treatment is concerned of a major importance in the study overall. It is composed of four
(4) main steps: data observation, data selection or classification, data interpretation and data
analysis. In order to treat well the data I collected, I will take the recorded speeches that I
have taken from my laptop. After that, I will combined my first hand data (the data I’ve taken
directly from some Wolof native speakers) with my second hand data (the data I’ve taken

12
from written documents by other researchers) in order to have a richer corpus. Then, I will
proceed to the transcription of the corpus via a very good media player such as VLC, Gom
Player, Groove, etc. I will do the transcription by respecting the International Phonetic
Alphabet (IPA).

5. Provisional Plan

I intend to proceed with this work with two main parts:

 Part 1: will be composed of three main chapters.

 Chapter 1: Reciprocity in English in terms of morphology and semantics;
 Chapter 2: Reciprocity in Wolof in terms of morphology and semantics;
 Chapter 3: Differences and similarities of English and Wolof in terms of morphology
and semantics;
 Part 2: will be divided into three main chapters.
 Chapter 1: Reciprocity in English in terms of syntax and semantics;
 Chapter 2: Reciprocity in Wolof in terms of syntax and semantics;
 Chapter 3: Differences and similarities in English and Wolof in terms of syntax and
semantics;

6. Time management

Doing research is definitely not an easy at all. We cannot do a good research without having a
good time management, therefore a good organization with total discipline. The organization
must go from the beginning up to the end of the work in order to avoid the risk of wrapping
up the work, or being late, or even worse which is not to be able to complete the work. Thus,
to successfully complete my research, Ihad to organizemy time as following.

My work was mostly done in Dakar, in Touba and in the Louga Region, especially Koki.

 From June to August: I started with collecting data which took me three
months.

13
  From August to October, I proceeded on the data analysis. I took my time to
observe, to interpret and to transcribe books, articles, reviews, recordings, etc.
related to my topic.
 From October to December: After having done all of that, I began the writing
of the report. Then, I finally submitmy work to my supervisor.

7. Bibliographical References

CREISSELS Denis & NOUGUIER-VOISIN Sylvie.,1-2 october 2004, The verbal suffixes of
Wolof coding valency changes and the notion of co-participation. RECIPROCITY AND
REFLEXIVITY, FU Berlin, pp16

DALRYMPLE, MARY et. al., 1998, Reciprocal expressions and the concept of reciprocity,
Linguistics and Philosophy 21, 159-210.

DIAGNE, Mbacké, 2009, Bref aperçu grammatical et lexical du bayot-kugere, les Editions du
livre universel, Dakar

FRIES, 1995, Teaching English as a foreign language, English language institute, university
of Michigan press.

KONIG Ekkehard & KUHLE Anneliese., 2007, Concepts of Reciprocity in Linguistics and
other Fields, Freie Universität Berlin & Utrecht Institute of Linguistics, pp6

KONIG Ekkehard., 2005, Reciprocity in Language: Cultural Concepts and Patterns of

Encoding, Netherlands Institute for Advanced Study, pp27

KONIG Ekkehard & MOYSE-FAURIE Claire., Towards a Typology of Reciprocity:

Concepts and Patterns of Encoding, FU Berlin & LACITO, CNRS, pp9

KONIG Ekkehard & MOYSE-FAURIE Claire., “Towards a typology of reciprocal

constructions: Focus on German and Japanese.” Linguistics 44.271-302.

MAJID Asifa, EVANS Nicholas, GABY Alice and LEVINSON Stephen C., March 7th 2011,
The Grammar of Exchange: A comparative Study of Reciprocal Constructions Across
Languages. ed= Debi Roberson, UK, frontiers in Psychology, pp16

14
MUNRO, P. and GAYE, D., 1997, Ay Baati Wolof, University of California, UCLA
Occasional Papers in Linguistics, pp382

RUBINSTEIN A., Groups in the Semantics of Reciprocal Verbs, University of Massachusetts

Amherst, pp14

SAUERLAND Uli., The Representation of Reciprocals in Grammar, Massachusetts Institute

of Technology, pp15

SAMBOU Pierre., 2016, Typological comparison, Senegal, UCAD, pp50

SILONI Tal., Reciprocal Verbs and Symmetry, pp71

Tamba Khady., Anaphora Questionnaire Response – Wolof, Ken Safir, Rutgers University,
pp68

Grammaise – Le Cours de Grammaire Anglaise, Chap 1 : Auxiliaires be, do et have, pp66

WEBOGRAPHY

https://wordsinasentence.com/reciprocal-in-a-sentence/, Word In A Sentence, Reciprocal in a

sentence, 27/09/2017

https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/each_other, 2017, English Oxford Living

Dictionnaries,27/09/ 2017

http://www.k12reader.com/term/reciprocal-pronouns/, 2017, K12Reader, Reading

Instructions Resources, 27/09/ 2017

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reciprocal_(grammar), 2017, Wikipedia, Reciprocal

(grammar), 27/09/ 2017

15