Semantic Functions of Swahili Interjections - Term Paper Example

College name Programme name Course name Course code Task title Academic year-Semester 1 Introduction Swahili Interjections, as is the case with other languages, have multiple pragmatic and semantic implications in utterances. Their meanings change with contexts that occasion their production (Ameka, 2006). Several plausible explanations have been given forth for the multiplicity of use and meaning of exclamations and discourse particles. These include the two broad dichotomies for semantically analyzing interjections: the conceptualist and the socio-communicative (procedural) approaches (Wharton, 2003; Goffman, 1981). In conducting a semantic analysis of selected Swahili interjections, this paper uses these premises to explicate each interjection in context. Analysis criteria are outlined before the semantic analyses of the three Swahili interjections: eti, ala and salale. 2 Criteria for semantic analysis of interjections Interjections have been traditionally analyzed by referring to their functions. Three basic viewpoints emerge from the functional criteria: emotive for expressing feelings; volitive for wants and cognitive for thoughts (Wierzbicka, 1991, 1992). The semantic contents for the three are ‘I feel’ ‘I want’ and ‘I think’ respectively. Ameka (2006) discusses phatic interjections that are for maintaining intimacy; discourse fillers carry this semantic content. Subjective interjections signal the hearer of an event that affects one physically or emotionally (Montes, 1999). These classifications may be broadly called conceptualist, a terminology used by Wharton (2003). The socio-communicative criterion deals with the role of interjections in communication. One communicative role identified is the one for guiding the hearer on how to take the proposition to which an utterance is attached (Sperber & Wilson, 1995; Wharton, 2003). In this sense, interjections play a procedural role called a higher-level explicature or indexing by defining the attitudinal parameters within which the proposition should be taken. The attitude could be that of intimate, serious, humorous, sad, excited or threatening nature. Interjections convey the semantic content ‘take the proposition as an X’. Wharton (2003) further argues that when they occur on their own as utterances, interjections communicate, though unclearly, the speaker’s cognitive or affective state. 3 Semantic analyses of Swahili interjections: eti, ala and salale. These are among the most commonly used Swahili primary interjections. Mohammed (2001) identifies two types of Swahili interjections: word structures that are basically interjections and those that have other functions than interjections. Other linguists list primary and secondary interjections. Wilkins (1992) for example provides what Gehweler (2008) calls formal and functional properties of primary interjections: they are independent lexical forms that constitute utterances; they do not typically enter into syntactic relationships with other word classes; they are usually are formed from by single morphemes; lastly, they don’t allow inflection or derivation. 3.1 Eti The interjection eti same as ati may function as an attention caller, a pardoner, a diminutive marker, or an expletive of several (including contradicting) emotions like surprise, disgust, amusement and doubt. The given context comprises three interlocutors: mother, son and daughter named Mama, Baraka and Halima respectively. Halima tells Mama: Baraka anasema eti mimi ni mlevi. Baraka says that I am a drunkard. ‘Baraka accuses me of drinking.’ Baraka says something new. I want you to know that what he says is wrong.(volitive) I think he is accusing me. (cognitive) The sense in which ati is used here seems to defy many earlier assumptions made of interjections that they are syntactically independent and peripheral. In the above utterance, the interjection plays a syntactic role of an optional conjunction. Without it the structure reads: (1) Baraka anasema mimi ni mlevi. ‘Baraka says I am a drunkard.’ Though syntactically similar, utterance (1) is semantically different from (2) in the sense that the element of accusation is lacking in the latter. It is clear that the presence of the optional conjunction in the English forms does not connote accusation. Eti also introduces new knowledge. Should the mother ask Halima (2) Baraka anasema wewe ni mlevi? ‘Is Baraka saying you are a drunkard?’ Halima would reply: (3) Eti! The role of eti in (4) conforms to what is called indexing or the higher-level explicature. (Wharton, 2003; Wilson & Sperber, 1995). The attitude with which the utterance should be understood is that of contempt. The eti in (4) also repairs utterance (3) that the proposition should go beyond what it claims to indicate its untruthfulness. Eti also marks surprise (emotive) and to beg for someone’s pardon (phatic). Halima tells the mother: (5) Halima: Baraka amelewa. ‘Baraka is drunk.’ (6) Mama: Eti! ‘What!’ (7) Halima: Baraka amelewa. ‘Baraka is drunk.’ The exclamatory in (6) plays two roles: expressing disbelief and asking for confirmation. It is not obvious which of the meanings the overriding one is. It can be explicated as follows: Mama: Eti! ‘What!’ Did I get it correctly? ‘Say it again’ (phatic). I can’t believe what I hear. ‘It threatens emotionally’ (subjective). In this utterance, eti has been used for interpersonal reasons, that is, to respond or react to the preceding discourse (Gehweler, 2008). It has also been used to elicit repletion or clarity. Lastly the interjection eti can be used to negotiate for a turn or attention and as a filler in a conversation. Baraka may interject and say: (8)Halima anadai pia eti… ‘Halima is claiming also that…’ Halima is saying something Let me say what Halima is saying.(phatic) Wait you hear Halima’s claim.(phatic filler) Halima’s claim is something new Gehweler (2008) outlines the textual functions of interjections. They include discourse initiation or claiming attention; aiding an interlocutor to acquire floor; filling and sustaining discourse or holding the floor and denoting new or old information. Utterance (8) clearly brings out all these meanings simultaneously. 3.2 Ala Unlike eti which can be in the propositional sentence initial or middle, ala occurs on its own sentence either before or after the propositional sentence. It is basically an expletive of annoyance. It may also suggest warning, threat or the speaker’s intents. The context involves children in school, they have written graffiti on the board. The teacher comes in and tells them: (9) Ala! Mmeandika maneno haya. ‘Hey! You have written such.’ Depending on other constraints in the context, ala here may be explicated thus: Ala! Mmeandika maneno haya. ‘Hey! You have written such.’ You mean you can do that? (emotive – surprise) You dare do such? (emotive – disbelief ) It is very annoying. (emotive – annoyance ) Other constraints may render the utterance to be explicated thus: I can act on you. (subjective – emotionally affects me) The above explications arise because of the undesirably unexpected act that occasions the exclamative. Ala can also give a positive contrasting meaning of what is given above when the act is desirably unexpected. Consider: (9) Ala! Mmeandika maneno haya. ‘Hey! You have written such.’ I can’t believe you can do such. (It’s amazing) 3.3 Salale/masalale! The second is a plural variant of the first. This exclamative displays a very rare characteristic with interjections. It is the only primary Swahili interjection that takes a plural morpheme [ma]. This again defies the obligatory parameters for interjections cited at the onset. Wilkins (1982) rules out derivation and inflection for interjections. Another unique quality of this interjection is that it post modifies another interjection lo! This results into the following utterances: (10) Lo salale! (11) Lo masale! The primary meaning for salale is astonishment (Mohammed, 2006). Masalale means intense astonishment. It could a pleasant or unpleasant emotion. Consider the context in which, after a football match a spectator says: (13) Salale! Sunderland wameshinda Manchester United. ‘Oho! Sunderland has beaten Manchester United’ I know something happened.(cognitive) I did not expect it.(subjective) I am pleasantly surprised [If I am supporting Sunderland] (emotive/subjective) Or I am shocked [If I am a Man U supporter] (emotive/subjective) (14) Masalale! Sunderland wamechapa Manchester United 20 – 0. ‘Oho! Sunderland has beaten Manchester United 20-0’ I have some news. (phatic) The news is shocking.(subjective/emotive) The news is very shocking.(intensified emotive/subjective) The intensification of salale can be achieved in two ways: adding the pluralizing prefix ma- to form masalale or prolonging the penultimate syllable. In the same vein masalale can also be intensified by prolonging the penultimate syllable. A summary of the semantic functions of three Swahili interjections Semantic meaning Textual/illocutionary function Eti/ati ala Salale/masale I’d like to take a turn/the floor Attention calling √ √ √ Wait there is something I am saying Discourse filler √ Look I have some information for you Denoting new or old information √ √ √ I am contradicting what has been said Indexing/repairing √ This is what I feel/think about this information Reacting √ √ √ Repeat what you have just said Repairing √ My feelings on this are more than ordinary Intensifying √ I want to relate the ideas on either side Marking clausal dependence √ I am warning you of what to come High-level implicature √ I’d like to tell you how to treat this statement Indexing √ √ √ It is something I think Cognitive √ It is something I feel Emotive √ √ √ It something I want Volitive √ 4 Conclusion The study of interjections interests both formal and functional linguists due to their ambivalent nature and role. It has been established in this paper that the three Swahili interjections eti, ala and salale share as much as they vary in usage and meaning. Eti could be the most commonly used interjection with the largest semantic field. It can be embedded in a proposition. Swahili interjections like salale do allow inflections and may modify other interjections like lo! Lastly Swahili interjections carry semantic meaning within the two broad categories of conceptual and socio-communicative or procedural references. References Ameka, F. (2006) Interjections. Encyclopaedia of Language and Linguistics. Ed. K. Brown. Amsterdam: Elsevier 743-746. Gehweler, E. (2008) From proper name to primary interjection: The case of gee! Journal of Historical Pragmatics 9 (1)71-93 Goffman, E. (1981) Forms of Talk. Oxford: Blackwell. Mohammed, M.A. (2001) Modern Swahili Grammar. Dar Es Salaam: EAEP. Montes, R.G. (1999) The Development of Discourse Markers in Spanish: Interjections.” Journal of Pragmatics 31: 1289-1319. Sperber, D. & D. Wilson. (1995) Relevance: Communication and Cognition. Oxford: Blackwell. Wharton, T. (2003) Interjection, Language, and the ‘Showing/Saying’ Continuum. Pragmatics and Cognition 11 39-91. Wilkins, D. (1992) Interjections as deictics. Journal of Pragmatics 18: 119-158. Wierzbicka, A. (1991) Cross-Cultural Pragmatics: The Semantics of Human Interaction. Berlin: Moutonde Gruyter. Wierzbicka, A. (1992) The semantics of interjection. Journal of Pragmatics 18: 159-192. Read More

3.1 Eti The interjection eti same as ati may function as an attention caller, a pardoner, a diminutive marker, or an expletive of several (including contradicting) emotions like surprise, disgust, amusement and doubt. The given context comprises three interlocutors: mother, son and daughter named Mama, Baraka and Halima respectively. Halima tells Mama: Baraka anasema eti mimi ni mlevi. Baraka says that I am a drunkard. ‘Baraka accuses me of drinking.’ Baraka says something new. I want you to know that what he says is wrong.(volitive) I think he is accusing me.

(cognitive) The sense in which ati is used here seems to defy many earlier assumptions made of interjections that they are syntactically independent and peripheral. In the above utterance, the interjection plays a syntactic role of an optional conjunction. Without it the structure reads: (1) Baraka anasema mimi ni mlevi. ‘Baraka says I am a drunkard.’ Though syntactically similar, utterance (1) is semantically different from (2) in the sense that the element of accusation is lacking in the latter.

It is clear that the presence of the optional conjunction in the English forms does not connote accusation. Eti also introduces new knowledge. Should the mother ask Halima (2) Baraka anasema wewe ni mlevi? ‘Is Baraka saying you are a drunkard?’ Halima would reply: (3) Eti! The role of eti in (4) conforms to what is called indexing or the higher-level explicature. (Wharton, 2003; Wilson & Sperber, 1995). The attitude with which the utterance should be understood is that of contempt. The eti in (4) also repairs utterance (3) that the proposition should go beyond what it claims to indicate its untruthfulness.

Eti also marks surprise (emotive) and to beg for someone’s pardon (phatic). Halima tells the mother: (5) Halima: Baraka amelewa. ‘Baraka is drunk.’ (6) Mama: Eti! ‘What!’ (7) Halima: Baraka amelewa. ‘Baraka is drunk.’ The exclamatory in (6) plays two roles: expressing disbelief and asking for confirmation. It is not obvious which of the meanings the overriding one is. It can be explicated as follows: Mama: Eti! ‘What!’ Did I get it correctly? ‘Say it again’ (phatic). I can’t believe what I hear.

‘It threatens emotionally’ (subjective). In this utterance, eti has been used for interpersonal reasons, that is, to respond or react to the preceding discourse (Gehweler, 2008). It has also been used to elicit repletion or clarity. Lastly the interjection eti can be used to negotiate for a turn or attention and as a filler in a conversation. Baraka may interject and say: (8)Halima anadai pia eti… ‘Halima is claiming also that…’ Halima is saying something Let me say what Halima is saying.(phatic) Wait you hear Halima’s claim.

(phatic filler) Halima’s claim is something new Gehweler (2008) outlines the textual functions of interjections. They include discourse initiation or claiming attention; aiding an interlocutor to acquire floor; filling and sustaining discourse or holding the floor and denoting new or old information. Utterance (8) clearly brings out all these meanings simultaneously. 3.2 Ala Unlike eti which can be in the propositional sentence initial or middle, ala occurs on its own sentence either before or after the propositional sentence.

It is basically an expletive of annoyance. It may also suggest warning, threat or the speaker’s intents. The context involves children in school, they have written graffiti on the board. The teacher comes in and tells them: (9) Ala! Mmeandika maneno haya. ‘Hey! You have written such.’ Depending on other constraints in the context, ala here may be explicated thus: Ala! Mmeandika maneno haya. ‘Hey! You have written such.’ You mean you can do that? (emotive – surprise) You dare do such?

(emotive – disbelief ) It is very annoying. (emotive – annoyance ) Other constraints may render the utterance to be explicated thus: I can act on you. (subjective – emotionally affects me) The above explications arise because of the undesirably unexpected act that occasions the exclamative.

Read More