10.6092/issn.2785-0943/16450
In a dialect survey of Bade (Chadic), Schuh (1981) lists several morphosyntactic, phonological, and lexical innovations differentiating Bade varieties. While certain innovations may be attributed to the influence of Kanuri, e.g., a sound change r &gt; r̃ in Western Bade, other features are difficult to accommodate in terms of convergence with neighboring languages. Probably the most striking innovation concerns so called nunation in Western Bade, i.e., common nouns in their indefinite citation form take a suffix -n, a feature which is not only absent in all other varieties of the Bade-Ngizim group, but also in other non-related languages of the region. Divergence across varieties of the Bade language cannot be sufficiently explained in terms of language-internal processes (e.g., analogy), or contact, or extra-linguistic factors like prestige and attitudes. This paper explores the significance of Larsen’s (1917) hardly noticed concept of naboopposition (neighbor-opposition) in filling this gap.
application/pdf
2785-0943
16450
1
en
Georg Ziegelmeyer
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0
Linguistic Typology at the Crossroads
neighbor-opposition
Divergence across Bade Varieties ‒ A Case of Naboopposition?
Text.Serial.Journal
https://typologyatcrossroads.unibo.it/
3
Research articles
2023-11-30
2023-02-11
2023-11-30
2023-11-30
126-146
LTC
Georg Ziegelmeyer
2023/11/30
10.6092/issn.2785-0943/16450
126
University of Vienna
2785-0943
1
neighbor-opposition
en
146
<p><span data-contrast="none">Ziegelmeyer, Georg. 2018. A note on transitivity in Gashua Bade. </span><em><span data-contrast="none">Frankfurter Afrikanistische Bl&auml;tter</span></em><span data-contrast="none"> 26. 171&ndash;183.</span><span data-ccp-props="{&quot;335551550&quot;:6,&quot;335551620&quot;:6,&quot;335559685&quot;:284,&quot;335559991&quot;:284}">&nbsp;</span></p>
Divergence across Bade Varieties ‒ A Case of Naboopposition?
https://typologyatcrossroads.unibo.it/article/download/16450/16972
3
             Linguistic Typology at the Crossroads 3-1 (2023): 126-146                   ISSN 2785-0943



             Divergence across Bade Varieties ‒ A Case of
                                         Naboopposition?

                                          GEORG ZIEGELMEYER
                                             UNIVERSITY OF VIENNA




                      Submitted: 12/02/2023               Revised version: 15/09/2023
                         Accepted: 22/09/2023                  Published: 30/09/2023



                     Articles are published under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (The authors
                     remain the copyright holders and grant third parties the right to use, reproduce, and share the article).




                                                     Abstract
In a dialect survey of Bade (Chadic), Schuh (1981) lists several morphosyntactic, phonological,
and lexical innovations differentiating Bade varieties. While certain innovations may be
attributed to the influence of Kanuri, e.g., a sound change r > r̃ in Western Bade, other features
are difficult to accommodate in terms of convergence with neighboring languages. Probably the
most striking innovation concerns so called nunation in Western Bade, i.e., common nouns in
their indefinite citation form take a suffix -n, a feature which is not only absent in all other
varieties of the Bade-Ngizim group, but also in other non-related languages of the region.
Divergence across varieties of the Bade language cannot be sufficiently explained in terms of
language-internal processes (e.g., analogy), or contact, or extra-linguistic factors like prestige and
attitudes. This paper explores the significance of Larsen’s (1917) hardly noticed concept of
naboopposition (neighbor-opposition) in filling this gap.


Keywords: Bade; Kanuri; Wider Lake Chad Region hyperdialectalism; neighbor-opposition.




1. Introduction


Bade [bde] belongs to the Bade-Ngizim group of West Chadic B.1 (Afro-Asiatic)1 and
is spoken in Yobe State, northern Nigeria, along the Kəmadugu Yobe “River of Yo”, a


The ISO-code 639-3, the genus and the family of each language mentioned have been retrieved from
1


Glottolog.

https://doi.org/10.6092/issn.2785-0943/16450                                                                                126
Linguistic Typology at the Crossroads 3-1 (2023): 126-146


major tributary to Lake Chad. The administrative, commercial, and cultural center of
Bade speakers is Gashua, which became the headquarters of the Bade Division in
1946. Other languages of the group are Duwai [dbp] spoken in a contiguous region
east of Bade, and Ngizim [ngi] which is spoken in an area somewhat separated 80 to
100 kilometers to the south around Potiskum. Extinct members of the Bade-Ngizim
group are Auyo, Shira, and Teshena, which were spoken somewhat west of the
present-day Bade speaking area (cf. Schuh 2001, Broß 1997) (see Figure 1).




 Figure 1: Language map of the Bade and surrounding languages in northeastern Nigeria (based on
     the map published in Schuh 2001: 389 and used with permission of Rüdiger Köppe Verlag).



                                                                                               127
Ziegelmeyer                                                           Divergence across Bade Varieties


While Duwai and Ngizim are dialectally rather homogeneous, Bade is linguistically
very diverse to the extent that one could speak of different Bade languages. On the
basis of morpho-syntactic, phonological, and lexical innovations, Schuh (1981)
subdivided varieties into Western Bade, Southern Bade, and Northern Bade, and he
stated (1981: 203) that: “in some respects Bade ‘dialects’ look at least as distinct from
each other as Bade does from Ngizim”. Northern Bade includes the demographically
large dialect of Gashua, which is the present-day capital of the Bade society and the
hometown of the Mai Bade (“King of Bade”) and his royal court.
     There is hardly any information on Southern Bade, except from what has been
written in Schuh’s dialect survey (1981), since most publications on Bade deal with
the western variety—e.g., Lukas (1968, 1974/75), Wente-Lukas (1967/68), Schuh
(1975, 1977, 1981, 2003, 2005), and the dictionary by Dagona (2004). Information
on Gashua Bade is provided in a dictionary by Tarbutu (2004), and in several articles
by Ziegelmeyer (e.g., 2010, 2013, 2014, 2015a, 2015b, 2017a, 2018)2. The data
presented and discussed here come from Schuh (1981, 2003, 2005), Ziegelmeyer
(2013, 2014), and the dictionaries by Dagona (2004) and Tarbutu (2004).
     According to Schuh (2003: 4): “[a]s with most peoples who have not exercised
power and influence beyond their own region, little is known about the early history
of the people who speak languages of the Bade-Ngizim group”. Bade speakers trace
their origin to the town of Badr in present-day Saudi Arabia, from where they were
expelled by the Prophet Mohammed because of their denial to accept Islam. However,
we assume that speakers of Chadic languages have a long history in the Wider Lake
Chad Region, and believe, with the widely accepted scenario (cf. Jaggar 2010), that
speakers of Chadic languages began to spread westwards across the Sahara into the
Lake Chad basin after proto-Afro-Asiatic split up into subfamilies (probably some six
thousand years ago when the Sahara started gradually transforming into an arid
desert). According to Jaggar (2010: 47):


        historically Chadic languages were probably spoken from northwest Nigeria to
        their present extent in the Chad Republic, i.e., to the west and south of Lake Chad,
        and over time some were replaced by Hausa in the west, and by Kanembu and
        Chadian Arabic to the east.


2
    My own data on Gashua Bade were collected during several field trips between 2007 and 2010 as
part of the project “Dynamics of Linguistic Change in northeastern Nigeria”. I gratefully acknowledge
the sponsorship of the Austrian Science Funds (FWF) [P 19408].


                                                                                                  128
Linguistic Typology at the Crossroads 3-1 (2023): 126-146


“Kanurization” of Bade speakers is corroborated by the fact that one of the present-
day Kanuri clans is named “Bedde”, or as Migeod (1924: 109) put it:


      As to the tribes along the River Yobe, first [moving east to west] come the Mobber,
      who are largely Bedde by origin, but now only speak Kanuri, though not very
      purely. Nobody ever says, “I am Mobber.” He will say he is Bedde or some other
      tribe, or a man of some particular town, generally the latter.


Historical accounts on Bade society, e.g., Campbell-Irons (1914) go back to the mid of the
18th century and mention the Gidgid clan settling in Gidgid, a village south of the present-
day Bade speaking area. The Gidgid clan became the ruling clan of the Bade confederation,
and according to Schuh (1981: 204), their modern dominance emerged as follows:


      the Bades were continually subject to the predations of the politically and
      numerically superior Kanuri from Bornu and Hausa from Hadejiya. Finally, in the
      mid-19th century (my sources conflict as to dates, but it must have been between
      1825 and 1840), the powerful and warlike Gidgid chief, Lawan Babuje moved his
      capital to the site of the town now called ‘Gorgoram’ on maps.


Gogaram actually means ‘without chopping’ and is located in an area of dense, uncleared
bush. Note that the language of the court of the Mai Bade is called Gogarambu, which is
linguistically not Bade, but (Manga) Kanuri (cf. Schuh 2003). Thus, we are confronted
with a situation similar to that of England after the Norman invasion, when the court
was speaking French, while the masses used English. Today speakers of different Bade
varieties use the term “Bade” as a general ethnic designation, regardless of clan, dialect,
etc.
   As already briefly mentioned above, in terms of language contacts all Bade varieties
were under strong influence of Kanuri [knc], a Saharan language (Nilo-Saharan, Western
Saharan) spoken mostly in the Borno and Yobe States of Nigeria. Kanuri influence is
heavily manifested in the vocabularies of Bade varieties, as well as in several other
neighboring languages, mostly of the Chadic branch, but e.g., also in eastern Fulfulde
varieties [fub, fuv] (Atlantic-Congo, Atlantic), and Nigerian, or Shuwa Arabic [shu]
(Afro-Asiatic, Semitic).
   We are able to determine that the period of heaviest borrowing from Kanuri must have
been between the 16th and the 18th century—i.e. when the Kanem-Borno Empire
exercised its greatest power—because the loanwords in Bade varieties lack several
phonological features that emerged in Kanuri in somewhat more recent periods (cf.
Schuh 2003). Thanks to an early description of Kanuri by Koelle (1954), we are able to


                                                                                            129
Ziegelmeyer                                                                  Divergence across Bade Varieties


determine that changes like labial vocalization and velar weakening started to become
active not earlier than the beginning of the 19th century. Table 1 shows a few examples
of consonant weakening in present-day Kanuri and the respective loanwords in Gashua
and Western Bade.


    Gloss              Modern Kanuri         Koelle 1854         Gashua Bade           Western Bade
    friend             sawà3                 sōbà                sōbà                  sōbān
    medicine           kùrwûn                kargùn              kàrg̃ ûn              kàrgùnən
    sword              kàshār̀                    ̀ àr
                                             kashāg              kàsakàr ̃             gasakarən


                           Table 1: Consonant weakening in Modern Kanuri.


While Schuh (2003) mentions that in the 60ies and early 70ies many Bade speakers (male
and female) still had a good command of Kanuri as second language, things have changed
dramatically during the past 50 years. Today Hausa [hau] (Afro-Asiatic, Chadic, West-
Chadic A.1) has become the major lingua franca all over northern Nigeria and, especially
in urban centers, it was quickly establishing itself as the first language for many of the
inhabitants (cf. Newman 2000).
     Bade varieties are part of a broader linguistic contact zone which has been labelled
the “Wider Lake Chad Region” by Ziegelmeyer (2014). In general, the Wider Lake Chad
Region is characterized by various language contact settings, which lead to lexical
borrowing, as well as structural and semantic convergence mediated by bi- or
multilingual individuals.
     With respect to Bade varieties, as noted above, heavy borrowing of lexical material
from Kanuri is attested, e.g., in Schuh (2003). In addition to this, Bade partly also
converged towards Kanuri in its morpho-syntactic structures, especially with respect to
co- and subordination strategies (see e.g., Ziegelmeyer 2010, 2015b). While Kanuri did
not take over many loanwords from its neighbors it, nevertheless, partly converged in its
typological structures towards Chadic languages, e.g., loss of ATR vowel harmony,




3
    Transcription: vowel length is marked with a macron, e.g., ā; low tones with grave accent, e.g., à;
falling tones with circumflex accent, e.g., â; high tones remain unmarked, e.g., a; ə represents a central
mid vowel; implosives are represented by hooked letters, e.g., ɓ; the voiced lateral fricative [ɮ] by jl;
the retroflex flap [ɽ] by r, and the tapped or trilled [ɾ] by r;̃ c and j are the palato-alveolar affricates
[ʧ] and [ʤ], and sh represents the postalveolar fricative [ʃ].


                                                                                                         130
Linguistic Typology at the Crossroads 3-1 (2023): 126-146


development of exceed comparatives, pluractionals formed by reduplication, and calquing
of semantic concepts of the verbs ‘eat’ and ‘drink’ (see e.g., Ziegelmeyer 2017b).
   Having outlined Bade varieties and the general contact scenarios of languages in the
Wider Lake Chad Region, we will present selected divergent features across languages of
the Bade-Ngizim group, especially from Western and Gashua Bade.


2. Divergence in Bade varieties


In this section, we outline selected morpho-syntactic innovations, which separate
Western from Gashua Bade. The question which comes up is of course what motivated
individual innovations, e.g., can specific innovations be interpreted as convergence
towards other languages of the region, especially the languages of wider communication
like Hausa, and Kanuri, or alternatively, do we have to look at other motivations to
account for them?


2.1. Loss of distinctive “r-sounds”


Like Hausa, Gashua Bade, Southern Bade, Ngizim, and Duwai have two distinct “r”
sounds, a retroflex flap [ɽ] (represented here as [r]) and a tapped or trilled “r”
(represented here as [r̃]). Tapped or trilled [r̃] is totally absent in Western Bade and
Schuh (1981) attributes the loss to contact with Kanuri where an [r̃] sound is also
missing. Examples are shown in Table 2.


         Gloss               Western Bade      Gashua Bade      Ngizim            Duwai
         undo, untangle      pər̀ tu           pər̀ t̃ u        pər̀ t̃ u         pər̀ t̃ o
         join                rəp
                               ̀ tu            rə̃ p
                                                   ̀ tu                           rə̃ p
                                                                                      ̀ to


                       Table 2: Loss of distinctive “r-sounds” in Western Bade.


2.2. Voiced second person subject pronouns

In languages of the Bade-Ngizim group, second person STAMP morphemes in the
singular can be reconstructed with initial k- for the completive, subjunctive, and
second subjunctive. While Southern Bade, Gashua Bade, and Ngizim still preserve




                                                                                              131
Ziegelmeyer                                                                 Divergence across Bade Varieties


the unvoiced velar k-, Western Bade employs the voiced velar g-. Examples are
provided in Table 3.


     Language                          Completive                Subjunctive         2nd Subjunctive
                             gə         ju                       gà, gā              gə̀
     Western Bade                                   ‘you went’
                             2SG.PFV    go                       2SG.SBJV            2SG.SBJV2
                             kə         ju
     Southern Bade                                  ‘you went’
                             2SG.PFV    go
                             kə         ju                       kà, kā              kə̀
     Gashua Bade                                    ‘you went’
                             2SG.PFV    go                       2SG. SBJV           2SG.SBJV2
                             ka         ju                       ka                  kà
     Ngizim                                         ‘you went’
                             2SG.PFV    go                       2SG. SBJV           2SG.SBJV2


              Table 3: Voiced and unvoiced second person singular STAMP morphemes.


2.3. Prefix a- on all independent pronouns

In Western Bade a prefix a- is used on all independent pronouns, while elsewhere in
languages of the Bade-Ngizim group the prefix appears only in third persons. This is
shown in Table 4.


                     Western Bade            Gashua Bade          Southern Bade            Ngizim
 1 SG                ayù                     niyù                 iyù                      iyù
 2 SG.M              agī ̀                   gī ̀                 gī ̀                     cì
 2 SG.F              agəm
                        ̀                    gəm
                                               ̀                  gəm
                                                                    ̀                      kəm
                                                                                             ̀
 3 SG.M              acì                     acî                  acî                      acî
 3 SG.F              atù                     atû                  atû                      atû
 1 PL.EXCL           ajà                     jà                   jà                       jà
 1 PL.INCL           agwà                    gwà                  gwà                      wà
 2 PL.               awùn                    wùn                  wùn                      kùn
 3 PL.               akcì                    aksì                 aksì                     akshî


                      Table 4: Independent pronouns in Bade-Ngizim languages.


2.4. Prefix a- in third person direct and indirect object pronouns


An innovation, which has taken place in Gashua Bade, is the use of a prefix a- in third
person direct and indirect object pronouns. This is probably due to an extension of
the independent pronouns, which employ the prefix a- in third persons in all dialects.



                                                                                                        132
Linguistic Typology at the Crossroads 3-1 (2023): 126-146


While with third person direct object pronouns Gashua Bade, as well as Ngizim use
the same form as in independent pronouns, in Western Bade “a-less” pronouns are
suffixed. Indirect object pronouns in Gashua Bade differ in as far as the prefix a-
merged with the vowel -ī-, i.e., [ē] < /ī + a/. Examples are provided in Table 5.

          Language            Direct object pronouns                      Indirect object pronouns
                              3 SG.M            3 SG.F    3 PL            3 SG.M       3 SG.F      3 PL
          Gashua Bade         aci               atu       aksi            -ē-ci        -ē-tu       -ē-ksi
          Western Bade        -ci               -tu       -ksi            -ī-ci        -ī-tu       -ī-ksi
          Ngizim              acî               atû       akshî           -ī-cî        -ī-tû       -ī-kshî


                   Table 5: Prefix a- in third person direct and indirect object pronouns.


2.5. Gender in the second person singular imperative

In contrast to other languages of the Bade-Ngizim group, Western Bade shows a
gender distinction in the second person singular imperative. This is remarkable
insofar as no apparent source for this change is available. Neither the languages of
wider communication (Hausa, Kanuri), nor surrounding varieties of the Bade-Ngizim
group exhibit this distinction. Examples are given in Table 6.

         Language                   2 SG.M                       2 SG.F                2 PL                 Gloss
                                    à gàf-ī                   à gàfə-m              à gàfa-wun              catch!
      Western Bade
                            IMP-catch-2SG.M              IMP-catch-2SG.F           IMP-catch-2PL

                                              a-kf-i                                  à-kf-a                go in!
      Southern Bade
                                              IMP-catch-2SG                        IMP-catch-2PL

                                              a-jlàɓ-i                               a-jlàɓ-a          sit down!
      Gashua Bade
                                              IMP-catch-2SG                        IMP-catch-2PL

                                              a-tə̀f-i                                a-tə̀f-a              enter!
      Ngizim
                                              IMP-catch-2SG                        IMP-catch-2PL


                       Table 6: Imperatives in languages of the Bade-Ngizim group.


2.6. The subjunctive


In the subjunctive mood, several innovations have taken place in Western Bade. While
all other Bade varieties have a (…L)H tone pattern on subjunctive verbs4, in Western

4
    Unlike other classes, verbs in Bade do not exhibit lexical tone; instead, tone patterns on verbs are
conditioned by tense-aspect-mood categories.


                                                                                                                     133
Ziegelmeyer                                                                           Divergence across Bade Varieties


Bade tone of subjunctive verbs is conditioned by the initial consonant, i.e. verbs
beginning in a voiced obstruent have a low tone on the first syllable, all other verbs
have a high tone. In addition to this, preverbal subject agreement clitics exhibit a
polar tone to the first syllable of the verb, except for first-, and second-person plural
which always bear low tones. This is exemplified in Table 7.


 Language                    Verb with voiced obstruent                          Verb with voiceless obstruent
                       ga             gàfì                                 gà               karmì
 Western Bade                                       ‘that you catch’                                ‘that you chop’
                       2SG.SBJV       catch                                2SG.SBJV         catch
                       kà             gàfi                                 kà               kàrmi
 Gashua Bade                                        ‘that you catch’                                ‘that you chop’
                       2SG.SBJV       catch                                2SG.SBJV         chop


                                 Table 7: Subjunctive in Western and Gashua Bade.


2.7. Negation of the perfective

Negation of the perfective aspect in Western Bade has become -m suffixed to the end
of the verb, while elsewhere in languages of the Bade-Ngizim group, negation is
expressed by bai (or something very similar such as ɓai, pai, be). According to Schuh
(1981: 214): “this took place through reduction of *bái to a syllabic nasal -ḿ, a
pronunciation still obvious in Karage and heard to a lesser extent in some WB
villages”. In addition to this, negated clauses with a perfective predicate in Western
Bade require a special negative perfective verb form rather than the affirmative
perfective verb form (see below). Examples are provided in Table 8.


 Gloss                             Western Bade                        Gashua Bade                      Ngizim
 I went                     nə           ju                    nən          ju                nà          ju
                            1SG.PFV      go                    1SG.PFV      go                1SG.PFV     go
 I didn’t go                nə           jāj̀ a-m              nən          ju        bai     nà          ju      bai
                            1SG.PFV      go\NEG-NEG            1SG.PFV      go        NEG     1SG.PFV     go      NEG

 I caught (it)              nə           gàfo                  nən          gàfau             na          gàfau
                            1SG.PFV      catch                 1SG.PFV      catch             1SG.PFV     catch
 I didn’t catch (it)        nə           gàfāf̀ a-m            nən          gafa      bai     na          gàfa    bai
                            1SG.PFV      catch\NEG-NEG         1SG.PFV      catch     NEG     1SG.PFV     catch   NEG



               Table 8: Negation of the perfective in languages of the Bade-Ngizim group.




                                                                                                                   134
Linguistic Typology at the Crossroads 3-1 (2023): 126-146


2.8. Loss of negative perfective verb forms

Languages of the Bade-Ngizim group probably all had a special form of verbs used to
express negation of completed actions or events. The verb final vowels -u or -o, depending
                                                                            ̀ a, where C is
on verb class used in the affirmative perfective are replaced by a suffix -āC
a copy of the root-final consonant. While Western and Southern Bade still have special
negative perfective verb forms, they got completely lost in Gashua Bade, Ngizim, and also
in Duwai. This is shown in Table 9.

          Language                    I went                              I didn’t go
                              nə           ju          nə                  jāj̀ a-m
          Western Bade
                              1SG.PFV      go          1SG.PFV             go\NEG-NEG
                              nə           ju          nə                  jāj̀ a       ɓai
          Southern Bade
                              1SG.PFV      go          1SG.PFV             go\NEG       NEG

                              nən          ju          nən                 jə̀          bai
          Gashua Bade
                              1SG.PFV      go          1SG.PFV             go           NEG

                              na           ju          na                  ju           bai
          Ngizim
                              1SG.PFV      go          1SG.PFV             go           NEG

                              yi           jùwo        yi                  jù           ɓai
          Duwai
                              1SG.PFV      go          1SG.PFV             go           NEG


                           Table 9: Loss of negative perfective verb forms.


2.9. Previous reference marker in the imperfective

In all varieties of the Bade-Ngizim group, except for Western Bade, transitive verbs in the
imperfective aspect are reconstructed as carrying the previous reference marker (PRM)
*-ku when not followed by a direct object. Thus, a simple imperfective sentence, e.g., ‘I
will tie’ is realized as illustrated in Table 10.

                             Language                        I will tie
                                                  na               taksà
                             Western Bade
                                                  1SG.IPFV         tie
                                                  nà               taksà-w
                             Gashua Bade
                                                  1SG.IPFV         tie-PRM
                                                  nà               taksà-w
                             Southern Bade
                                                  1SG.IPFV         tie-PRM
                                                  nā ̀             takwsà-w
                             Ngizim
                                                  1SG.IPFV         tie-PRM

                      Table 10: Previous reference marker in the imperfective.



                                                                                              135
Ziegelmeyer                                                                    Divergence across Bade Varieties


2.10. Progressive/habitual in Gashua Bade


In Chadic languages the basic function of the imperfective is to express
incompleteness and often comprises future, progressive (or durative), and/or habitual
notions. Typically, the imperfective employs a verbal noun or a form allied to verbal
nouns. In Ngizim the imperfective still expresses future, progressive or habitual
events, while in Western Bade the imperfective does not express habitual meaning5.
     In Gashua Bade, however, we can distinguish between imperfective expressing
future events, and progressive/habitual conveying ongoing and habitual meanings.
The primary mark for imperfective in languages of the Bade-Ngizim group is an
auxiliary ā + verbal noun. Historically, the auxiliary ā goes back to a preposition ‘in,
at, on’ and still is used as such in the modern languages. In Gashua Bade the primary
indicator for the progressive/habitual is a preverbal auxiliary và/va which is preceded
by an independent pronoun. According to Tarbutu (2004) the auxiliary và/va = gvà
goes back to the verb ə̀gvu ‘fall’. Examples are provided in Table 11.


Language        Aspect                  Example
                future                  Pātəmà        ā             bə̀nàk                àwai
                                        Fatima        3SG.IPFV      cook[VN].of           sauce
Gashua
                                        ‘Fatima will cook sauce.’
Bade
                progressive/habitual    ə̀bjləm       də            kayak         aksì    và       nē    balà
                                        hyena         and           squirrel      3PL     PROG     go    hunt
                                        ‘The hyena and the squirrel used to go for hunting.’
                future                  Sāku          ā             bə̀nà         kə̀m?
                                        Saku          3SG.IPFV      cook          Q

Western                                 ‘What will Saku cook?’
Bade            progressive             Sāku          ā             bə̀nà         kə̀m?
                                        Saku          3SG.IPFV      cook          Q

                                        ‘What is Saku cooking?’
                future                  nā ̀          wanà
                                        1SG.IPFV      work
                                        ‘I will work.’
Ngizim
                progressive             nā ̀           wanà
                                        1SG.IPFV      work
                                        ‘I am working.’


                              Table 11: Progressive/habitual in Gashua Bade.


5
    Western Bade has a habitual extension taking on this function.


                                                                                                           136
Linguistic Typology at the Crossroads 3-1 (2023): 126-146


It is likely that the split in Gashua Bade into imperfective and progressive/habitual is
conditioned by contact with Hausa, which exhibits future expressing tense (future-
time reference) and a range of modal (attitudinal) meanings, as well as imperfective
encompassing dimensions of durativity (action-in-progress) and habituality.


2.11. Nunation


Perhaps the most sensational feature separating Western Bade from Gashua Bade
is nunation, i.e., common nouns in Western Bade take a suffix -n (and a high tone
on the syllable containing the -n) in citation forms. Wente-Lukas (1967/68),
following Johannes Lukas (1968), adopted this term used in traditional Arabic
scholarship to refer to final -n on Arabic indefinite nouns, i.e., nouns in classical
Arabic, which do not take a definite article, are pronounced with a final -n. Note,
however, that nunation largely disappeared in most modern Arabic dialects. While
Lukas (1968) rules out a direct link between nunation in Semitic languages and
Bade, he, nevertheless, sees the possibility that nunation is an old and resistant
element, which was used for different purposes during various stages of language
development.
   Nunation finally took over the same functions in two languages far apart from
each other in the large territory of the same language phylum. Today nunation in
Western Bade is functionally similar to Arabic nunation and probably developed
through similar historical processes, though in Bade it is a relatively recent
innovation, which affected only Western Bade after its separation from other Bade
dialects. Schuh (2005: 590), following his previous works (Schuh 1975, 1977,
1983) states that:


      Nunation arises historically from a demonstrative that has become what
      Greenberg (1978) called a “Stage II Article”, i.e., a determiner that has become a
      grammaticalized affix on nouns and whose presence or absence is conditioned by
      the types of grammatical constructions the noun appears in. A cognate of nunation
      is found in the Gashua Bade masculine distal demonstrative suffix, -ān̂ i, e.g., kwàm
      ‘bull’, kwàmān̂ i ‘that bull’, but in Western Bade, nunation has extended to all
      nouns, not just masculine.




                                                                                              137
Ziegelmeyer                                                           Divergence across Bade Varieties


Thus, Western Bade has developed a Stage II article, which, itself, is now gender
neutral. Examples shown in Table 12 are taken from Schuh (2005) and show
several Western Bade nouns with nunation and their cognates in Gashua Bade
without nunation.


          Gender                 Western Bade      Gashua Bade        Gloss
          masculine: -ān         əv
                                  ̀ jān            əv
                                                    ̀ ji              monkey
                                 kùnān             kùnu               stomach
          feminine: -an          ək
                                  ̀ tlan           tlà                cow
                                 dan               dà                 eye
          masculine: -ən         mazàrən           mazàl              castrated goat
                                 ɗàcən             ‘yat               hair
          feminine: -ən          gùmcən            gùmci              chin
                                   ̀ m
                                 jījə ̀ ən         jəj̀ əm
                                                         ̀            thorn
          masculine: -en, -on    ùgzen             ùgzai              pubic hair
                                 fəfon             fəfau              breast
          feminine: -en, -on     gùnən             gunai              hip
                                 àpson             əp
                                                    ̀ sau             Bauhinia reticulata
          masculine: -īn         māp̀ əndīn        māp ̀ əndì         young man
          feminine: -īn          dàbīn             dàbi               hoe


                                Table 12: Nunation in Western Bade.


Wente-Lukas (1967/68) called nunation die unbestimmte Form, i.e., the indefinite
form, and according to Schuh (2005) this is a reasonable characterization of the
function of nunation. This may be exemplified best by showing the primary
environments where nunation is absent. Examples come from Schuh (2005: 591-592).


   •   Proper names and vocatives
       Gāj̀ i (youngest sibling); note, however, that proper names may take nunation
       in the sense of ‘a person called …’, e.g., Gāj̀ ān ‘a person named Gaji’.
       Madàwi! ‘Oh, shepherd!’, cf. madàwān ‘a shepherd’.



   •   Nouns with overt determiners
       For instance, gwàmā-w ‘the ram in question’, gwàmā-̀ mso ‘this ram’, gwàmā-̀ ri
       ‘his ram’, cf. gwàmān ‘a ram’.



                                                                                                  138
Linguistic Typology at the Crossroads 3-1 (2023): 126-146


    •    Repeated mention of a referent in narrative
         In narrative, the first mention of a referent usually has nunation, but
         subsequent mentions of the same referent cannot have nunation:


         (1) Lāb̀ ārən            ̀
                                mīna-n     ɗèk dəlā-n.      Dəlā   və̀ru
             story-NUN          lion-NUN and jackal-NUN     jackal go.out
             ‘Story of a lion and a jackal. The jackal went out …’


    •    Nouns used adverbially
         E.g., də̀mànən ‘rainy season’, but:


         (2) dùwau nàhu           ā      də̀man
             river       fill     in     rainy.season
             ‘The river fills during the rainy season.’


2.12. Predicative possession with ‘have’


Predicative possession, which is expressed by a transitive verb ‘have’, is rather rare
in the languages of the Wider Lake Chad region. With the exception of Gashua Bade
and Duwai it is also absent in the languages of the Bade-Ngizim group where
predicative possession usually uses a conjunctional strategy, i.e., a subject noun
phrase is directly followed by an associative conjunction ‘with’ (‘be with something’
= ‘have something’).
   In Gashua Bade such constructions have been replaced by an actual verb zu
‘have’ which, however, is aspectually restricted, occurring only in the completive
aspect with this meaning. Duwai also has a true verb dā m ̀ o ‘have’, and it is quite
puzzling why these two languages developed in this manner. According to Schuh
(1981: 247):


        the ‘be with’ type of construction to mean ‘have’ is reconstructable for the
        Bade/Ngizim/Duwai group and probably for proto-(West-)Chadic. So far I have
        not uncovered any etymologies for the roots zu and dām   ̀ o that help in
        understanding this.


Some examples are shown in Table 13.


                                                                                       139
Ziegelmeyer                                                                     Divergence across Bade Varieties




  Language            Example                                 Gloss                          Strategy
  Gashua Bade         nən          zə̀        dàbi            ‘I have a hoe.’
                      1SG.PFV      have       hoe
                                                                                                    have
  Duwai               kì           dām        tàgwda?         ‘Do you have money?’
                      2SG.M.PFV    have       money
  Southern Bade       aci          də̀k       dàbi            ‘He has a hoe.’
                      3SG.M        with       hoe
                                                                                                conjunctional
  Ngizim              ī            nā         dūk̀ à          ‘I have a horse.’
                      1SG          with       horse


                                     Table 13: Predicative possession.


3. Discussion


In the preceding section we have illustrated selected features across languages of the
Bade-Ngizim group which show divergence between the different varieties, especially
between Western and Gashua Bade. For the sake of convenience, I summarize the
crosslinguistic distribution of these features in Table 14 below.


Features                            Hausa     W.        Gashua        S.         Ngizim     Duwai       Kanuri
                                              Bade      Bade          Bade
Loss of distinctive “r-sounds”      A         B         A             A          A          A           B
Voiced second person subject                  A         B             B          B
pronouns
Prefix a- on all independent                  A         B             B          B
pronouns
Prefix a- in third person direct              A-A       B-B           A-B
and indirect object pronouns
Gender in the second person         B         A         B             B          B
singular imperative
Subjunctive                                   A         B             B          B
Negation of the perfective                    A         B             B          B
Loss of negative perfective                   A         B             A          B          B
verb forms
Previous reference marker in                  A         B             B          B          B
the imperfective
Progressive/habitual                A         B         A             B          B          B


        Table 14: summary of the crosslinguistic distribution of the features discussed in §2.



                                                                                                            140
Linguistic Typology at the Crossroads 3-1 (2023): 126-146


The question that comes up now is, what mechanisms and motivations triggered
divergence between those varieties? Generally, it is often assumed that convergence
of languages or dialects is the basic development in multilingual contact settings,
while the opposite process, i.e., divergence, often remains unexplained. For instance,
Kaufmann (2010: 481) states that: “divergence […] in language contact […] is
probably a rare element”.
   We believe with Braunmüller (2014: 2):


      […] that multilingual speakers are the ultimate source of all outcomes of contact
      between languages. Multilingualism, including the cognitive processes of
      multilingual language processing, are crucial for the types of development that
      may occur. Nevertheless, Kühl and Braunmüller mention language-internal (i.e.,
      linguistic characteristics), language-external (i.e., contact) and extra-linguistic
      (i.e., political and economic factors, prestige and attitudes) factors and
      mechanisms as dimensions that shape the contact setting and thereby set the stage
      for multilingual speakers’ linguistic behaviour.


In the absence of socio-linguistic studies and detailed accounts on Bade history, it is
difficult to evaluate extra-linguistic factors. However, we have no hints that political
or economic factors, prestige or language attitudes might be responsible for
innovating divergent features across Bade varieties.
   Language-internal factors may account for some features, e.g., the prefix a- in third
person direct and indirect object pronouns used in Gashua Bade (see section 2.4)
could be seen as an extension of the independent pronouns, which employ the prefix
a- in third persons in all dialects. Likewise, in Western Bade the prefix a- is used in
analogy on all independent pronouns, while elsewhere in languages of the Bade-
Ngizim group the prefix appears only in third persons (see section 2.3). Nevertheless,
while language-internal factors may explain the extension of the prefix a-, we still
cannot explain why this process was only applied in a single variety, i.e. Western
Bade, whereas other varieties remain stable in this respect.
   Language-external factors, i.e., contact, may account for some innovations, e.g.,
the loss of distinct r-sounds in Western Bade has been attributed to contact with
Kanuri (see section 2.1). Likewise, the development of a progressive/habitual aspect
in Gahsua Bade might be imputed to more recent contact with Hausa, which basically
distinguishes between a continuative/progressive and future aspect (see section 2.10).
However, again we do not have a sound explanation why the loss of distinct r-sounds


                                                                                            141
Ziegelmeyer                                                   Divergence across Bade Varieties


only affected Western Bade, while the development of a progressive/habitual aspect
took only place in Gashua Bade. There are no reasons to believe that speakers of the
western variety had more contacts with Kanuri speakers than speakers of other Bade
varieties, e.g., according to Schuh (2003) the number of Kanuri loanwords in Gashua
Bade (8.5%) is even slightly higher than in Western Bade (7.92%). Similarly, there
are no reasons to think that speakers of Gashua Bade had, or still have, more contact
with Hausa speakers than speakers of the other Bade varieties.
  The development of some other divergent features, which have been presented
above, could neither be explained with language-internal, language-external, nor
extra-linguistic factors. For instance, nunation in Western Bade (see section 2.11)
cannot be traced to language-internal analogy nor to contact with other languages of
the region. Moreover, marking indefiniteness on nouns is extremely rare in languages
of the Wider Lake Chad Region, and certainly does not exist in the former and present
languages of wider communication, i.e., Kanuri and Hausa. Arabic as a source for
nunation in Western Bade can be ruled out, i.e., there is no indication at all that
speakers of Western Bade had, or have, intense contact with speakers of Arabic.
Moreover, Islamisation among the Bade is rather a phenomenon of the second half of
the twentieth century, i.e., during the times when nunation developed in Western
Bade access to Islamic discourse was, if at all, restricted to members of the urban
upper class.
  Similarly, as far as we know, possessive predication by means of a transitive verb
‘have’ (see section 2.12) does not exist in any language in the area of investigation.
Possessive predication is typically expressed by comitative constructions (i.e. “to be
with something”), e.g., in Hausa, or by constructions like “at someone’s place there
exists something”, e.g., in Kanuri.
  Thus, we believe that, at the current stage of knowledge, some divergent features
across varieties of the Bade language have to be explained through recourse to
Larsen’s (1917) concept of naboopposition, i.e., neighbor-opposition, or what Trudgill
(1983) called hyperdialectalism. This is to say that distancing oneself from neighbors
should be considered a constant factor in the development of language. The principle
behind this concept is according to Braunmüller (2014: 25) that:


     speakers actively enlarge salient differences between local dialects, thereby
     creating a greater linguistic distance to the varieties spoken by their closest




                                                                                          142
Linguistic Typology at the Crossroads 3-1 (2023): 126-146


        neighbours. These so-called hyperdialectisms are intended to mark one’s own
        dialect as being unique and different from any other surrounding dialects.


For instance, in order to explain the emergence of nunation in Western Bade, or the
use of a transitive verb meaning ‘have’ in Gashua Bade and Duwai, we are inclined to
invoke Larsen’s (1917) hypothesis about neighbor-opposition, whereby speakers of a
language introduce some features to distinguish their language from surrounding
languages. While this is a plausible hypothesis, we nevertheless, do not have strong
evidence for it, as there is no data to provide clear answers at present.


4. Conclusions


In conclusion we believe that with respect to varieties of Bade neither language-
internal factors, e.g., analogy, nor language-external factors, i.e., contact, nor
extra-linguistic factors, e.g., prestige or language attitudes may sufficiently explain
the development of divergent features. Instead, neighbor-opposition might be the
principle which comes in to fill this gap, and we think that the fact that nearly
every Bade village can be assigned different phonological, morpho-syntactic, or
lexical idiosyncrasies corroborates this view. While our working hypothesis of
neighbor-opposition among Bade varieties seems to be attractive in the first
instance, it nevertheless, is negatively defined, i.e., in the absence of other sources
we suppose that neighbor-opposition might come in to fill this gap. In order to get
a clearer picture much more work on the internal relations within the Bade society
would be necessary.




Abbreviations

1= 1st person                        M    = masculine               SG   = singular
2= 2 person
       nd
                                     NEG   = negation               STAMP      =      subject-tense-
3= 3 person
       rd
                                     NUN    = nunation              aspect-mood-polarity
EXCL   = exclusive                   PFV   = perfective             SBJV   = subjunctive
F   = feminine                       PL   = plural                  SBJV2 = 2nd    subjunctive
IMP   = imperative                   PRM    = previous reference    VN   = verbal noun
IPFV   = imperfective                marker
INCL   = inclusive                   Q    = question word




                                                                                                 143
Ziegelmeyer                                                   Divergence across Bade Varieties


References


Braunmüller, Kurt. 2014. Introduction. In Braunmüller Kurt, Höder Steffen & Kühl
  Karoline (eds.), Stability and Divergence in Language Contact, 1–10. Amsterdam &
  Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Broß, Michael. 1997. Some remarks on the history of the extinct languages Auyo,
  Shira and Teshena. In Seidensticker Wilhelm & Bross Michael & Tela Baba Ahmad
  (eds.), Guddiri Studies: – Languages and Rock Paintings in Northeastern Nigeria, 37–
  65. Cologne: Rüdiger Köppe.
Campbell-Irons 1914. Bedde District, Bornu Province – Assessment Reported by Mr.
  Campbell-Irons. Typescript obtained in Gashua, Nigeria.
Dagona, Bala W. 2004. Bade-English-Hausa Dictionary – (Western Dialect). Potiskum:
  Ajami Press.
Greenberg, Joseph H. 1978. How does a language acquire gender markers? In Joseph
  H. Greenberg & Charles A. Ferguson & Edith A. Moravcsik (eds.), Universals of
  Human Language, Vol. 3: Word Structure, 47–82. Stanford, CA: Stanford University
  Press.
Jaggar, Philip J. 2010. The role of comparative/historical linguistics in reconstructing
  the past – What borrowed and inherited words tell us about the early history of
  Hausa. In Anne Haour & Benedetta Rossi (eds.), Being and Becoming Hausa –
  Interdisciplinary Perspectives, 35–58. Leiden & Boston: Brill.
Kauffman, G. 2010. Non-convergence despite language contact. In Peter Auer &
  Johannes E. Schmidt (eds.), Language and space. An international handbook of
  linguistic variation, Vol. 1 [Handbooks of Linguistics and Communication Science
  30.1], 478–493. Berlin/New York: de Gruyter Mouton.
Koelle, Sigismund W. 1954. A Grammar of the Bornu or Kanuri Language. London:
  Church Missionary Society.
Larsen, Amund B. (1917) 1993. Naboopposition – knot. In Ernst H. Jahr & Lorentz
  Ove & Marit Christoffersen (eds.), Historisk sprakvitenskap (Studier i Norsk
  Sprakvitenskap 5), 97–131. Oslo: Novus.
Lukas, Johannes. 1968. Nunation in afrikanischen Sprachen. Anthropos 63/64(1/2).
  97–114.
Lukas, Johannes. 1974/75. Studien zur Bade-Sprache (Nigeria). Afrika und Übersee
  58(2). 82–105.
Migeod, Frederick W.H. 1924. Through Nigeria to Lake Chad. London: Heath Crinton.



                                                                                          144
Linguistic Typology at the Crossroads 3-1 (2023): 126-146


Newman, Paul. 2000. The Hausa Language – An Encyclopedic Reference Grammar.
   New Haven: Yale University Press.
Schuh, Russell G. 1975. Nunation and Gender in Bade (Nigeria). Afrika und Übersee
   58(2). 106–118.
Schuh, Russell G. 1977. Bade/Ngizim determiner system. Afroasiatic Linguistics 4(3).
   101–174.
Schuh, Russell G. 1981. Using dialect geography to determine prehistory – A Chadic
   case study. Sprache und Geschichte in Afrika 3. 201–250.
Schuh, Russell G. 1983. The evolution of determiners in Chadic. In Ekkehard H. Wolff
   & Hilke Meyer-Bahlburg (eds.), Studies in Chadic and Afroasiatic Linguistics, 157–
   210. Hamburg: Helmut Buske.
Schuh, Russell G. 2001. Shira, Teshena, Auyo – Hausa’s (former) eastern neighbors.
   Sprache und Geschichte in Afrika 16/17. 387–435.
Schuh, Russell G. 2003. The Linguistic Influence of Kanuri on Bade and Ngizim.
   Maiduguri Journal of Linguistic and Literary Studies (MAJOLLS) 5. 55–89.
Schuh, Russell G. 2005. The nominal and verbal morphology of Western Bade. In Alan
   S. Kaye (ed.), Morphologies of Africa and Asia 54, 587–640. Winona Lake, IN:
   Eisenbrauns.
Tarbutu, Muktar M. 2004. Bade-English-Hausa Dictionary – (Gashua Dialect). Potiskum:
   Ajami Press.
Trudgill, Peter. 1983. On dialect: Social and geographical perspectives. Oxford: Basil
   Blackwell.
Wente-Lukas, Renate. 1967/68. Das Nomen in Bade (Nordnigerien). Afrika und
   Übersee 51. 91-116, 198–224.
Ziegelmeyer, Georg. 2010. Retention and innovation - On adverbial subordination in
   Gashua Bade. In Georg Ziegelmeyer & Norbert Cyffer (eds.), Aspects of Co- and
   Subordination - Case Studies from African, Slavonic and Turkic Languages, 119–144.
   Cologne: Rüdiger Köppe.
Ziegelmeyer, Georg. 2013. On the verbal system of Gashua Bade. Afrikanistik Online,
   2014(11,2).
Ziegelmeyer, Georg. 2014. Bade between its eastern and western neighbours – Past
   and present contact scenarios in northern Yobe State. In Anne Storch & Johannes
   Harnischfeger & Rudolf Leger (eds.), Fading Delimitations – Language and Culture in
   Historical Context, 95–112. Cologne: Rüdiger Köppe.




                                                                                  145
Ziegelmeyer                                                Divergence across Bade Varieties


Ziegelmeyer, Georg. 2015a. On the adjective class in Gashua Bade. Afrikanistik und
  Ägyptologie Online 2015(1).
Ziegelmeyer, Georg. 2015b. Coordination strategies in Bade and Ngizim. In Gian
  Claudio Batic & Sergio Baldi (eds.), Selected Proceedings of the Symposium on West
  African Languages, 145–159. Naples: Università degli Studi di Napoli “L'Orientale”.
Ziegelmeyer, Georg. 2017a. On verbal and nominal plurality in languages of the Bade-
  Ngizim group. Language Typology and Universals 70(1). 27–49.
Ziegelmeyer, Georg. 2017b. On the idiomaticity of Kanuri bu ‘eat’ and ya ‘drink’ – A
  case of calquing from Hausa? In Gian Claudio Batic & Rudolf Leger (eds.), Studia
  Africana – Papers in Honour of Sergio Baldi, 156–169. Cologne: Rüdiger Köppe.
Ziegelmeyer, Georg. 2018. A note on transitivity in Gashua Bade. Frankfurter
  Afrikanistische Blätter 26. 171–183.


CONTACT
georg.ziegelmeyer@univie.ac.at




                                                                                       146
