’n Oorsig oor die grammatiese beskrywing van die sogenaamde ‘onderwerpskakel’ in Sotho en Zulu: histories en kontemporêr

A synopsis of the grammatical description of the so-called ‘subject concord’ in Sotho and Zulu: historical and comtemporary views The term "concord” is generally used as an umbrella term for a diversity of language forms in the morphological description of language units in African languages. S...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: W. J. Pretorius
Format: Article
Language:Afrikaans
Published: AOSIS 1999-04-01
Series:Literator
Online Access:https://literator.org.za/index.php/literator/article/view/473
id doaj-e78a829c4ca948cd9b1822037c83c052
record_format Article
spelling doaj-e78a829c4ca948cd9b1822037c83c0522020-11-24T20:47:04ZafrAOSISLiterator0258-22792219-82371999-04-01202779010.4102/lit.v20i2.473409’n Oorsig oor die grammatiese beskrywing van die sogenaamde ‘onderwerpskakel’ in Sotho en Zulu: histories en kontemporêrW. J. Pretorius0Departement Afrikatale, Randse Afrikaanse Universiteit, Auckland ParkA synopsis of the grammatical description of the so-called ‘subject concord’ in Sotho and Zulu: historical and comtemporary views The term "concord” is generally used as an umbrella term for a diversity of language forms in the morphological description of language units in African languages. Since “concord" does not specifically indicate a unit of rank in the morphological hierarchy of language symbols, but implicitly refers to the function of language units, the result of this practice is that a purely grammatical distinction between related language units is not always possible. For example, historically and contemporarily, the so-called "subject concord" is often interpreted in morphologically diverse and often even contradictory ways. This article examines the grammatical status of the so-called "subject concord” in Northern Sotho and Zulu in terms of existing views regarding its morphological or word status in the light of Van Wyk's (1953, 1958 and 1967) research. Specific attention is paid to changes in rank, drawing a clear distinction between “subject concords” as verbal prefixal morphemes and “subject concords” as particle words. Finally, it is recommended that a clear grammatical distinction should be drawn between morphemes and words, and furthermore that reference to these units should differ terminologically. This viewpoint suggests that the term "concord" should rather be avoided completely.https://literator.org.za/index.php/literator/article/view/473
collection DOAJ
language Afrikaans
format Article
sources DOAJ
author W. J. Pretorius
spellingShingle W. J. Pretorius
’n Oorsig oor die grammatiese beskrywing van die sogenaamde ‘onderwerpskakel’ in Sotho en Zulu: histories en kontemporêr
Literator
author_facet W. J. Pretorius
author_sort W. J. Pretorius
title ’n Oorsig oor die grammatiese beskrywing van die sogenaamde ‘onderwerpskakel’ in Sotho en Zulu: histories en kontemporêr
title_short ’n Oorsig oor die grammatiese beskrywing van die sogenaamde ‘onderwerpskakel’ in Sotho en Zulu: histories en kontemporêr
title_full ’n Oorsig oor die grammatiese beskrywing van die sogenaamde ‘onderwerpskakel’ in Sotho en Zulu: histories en kontemporêr
title_fullStr ’n Oorsig oor die grammatiese beskrywing van die sogenaamde ‘onderwerpskakel’ in Sotho en Zulu: histories en kontemporêr
title_full_unstemmed ’n Oorsig oor die grammatiese beskrywing van die sogenaamde ‘onderwerpskakel’ in Sotho en Zulu: histories en kontemporêr
title_sort ’n oorsig oor die grammatiese beskrywing van die sogenaamde ‘onderwerpskakel’ in sotho en zulu: histories en kontemporêr
publisher AOSIS
series Literator
issn 0258-2279
2219-8237
publishDate 1999-04-01
description A synopsis of the grammatical description of the so-called ‘subject concord’ in Sotho and Zulu: historical and comtemporary views The term "concord” is generally used as an umbrella term for a diversity of language forms in the morphological description of language units in African languages. Since “concord" does not specifically indicate a unit of rank in the morphological hierarchy of language symbols, but implicitly refers to the function of language units, the result of this practice is that a purely grammatical distinction between related language units is not always possible. For example, historically and contemporarily, the so-called "subject concord" is often interpreted in morphologically diverse and often even contradictory ways. This article examines the grammatical status of the so-called "subject concord” in Northern Sotho and Zulu in terms of existing views regarding its morphological or word status in the light of Van Wyk's (1953, 1958 and 1967) research. Specific attention is paid to changes in rank, drawing a clear distinction between “subject concords” as verbal prefixal morphemes and “subject concords” as particle words. Finally, it is recommended that a clear grammatical distinction should be drawn between morphemes and words, and furthermore that reference to these units should differ terminologically. This viewpoint suggests that the term "concord" should rather be avoided completely.
url https://literator.org.za/index.php/literator/article/view/473
work_keys_str_mv AT wjpretorius noorsigoordiegrammatiesebeskrywingvandiesogenaamdeonderwerpskakelinsothoenzuluhistoriesenkontemporer
_version_ 1716811281401380864