# Reflexive constructions in Jóola Fóoñi

Denis Creissels, Alain-Christian Bassène

► To cite this version:

Denis Creissels, Alain-Christian Bassène. Reflexive constructions in Jóola Fóoñi. Reflexive constructions in the world's languages, Language Science Press, pp.117-115, 2023, 978-3-96110-411-6. 10.5281/zenodo.7874938 . hal-04677788

HAL Id: hal-04677788

https://hal.science/hal-04677788v1

Submitted on 26 Aug 2024

HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access
archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci-
entific research documents, whether they are pub-
lished or not. The documents may come from
teaching and research institutions in France or
abroad, or from public or private research centers.

L'archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est
destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents
scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non,
émanant des établissements d'enseignement et de
recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires
publics ou privés.

<figure><img src="image_1.png" /></figure>

Distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License
Denis Creissels

Laboratoire Dynamique du Langage (CNRS & Université Lyon 2, UMR 5596)

Alain Christian Bassène

Université Cheikh Anta Diop, Dakar

The reflexive constructions of Jóola Fóoñi (an Atlantic language spoken in south western Senegal) are characterized by a sharp distinction between subject-object coreference, which requires the use of derived forms of the verb, and other possible coreference relationships within the clause, which are not treated differently from coreference in discourse. Three verbal suffixes are involved in the coding of subject-object coreference, none of which is specialized in reflexive function: -ɔr (productive in reciprocal function, very marginally involved in reflexivization), -ɔ (productive in decausative and quasi-reflexive function, also used to encode re-flexivization with body-care verbs), and -ɔrɔ (the default marker of subject-object coreference, also used to mark self-intensification of the subject).

### 1 Introduction

Jóola Fóoñi (a. k. a. Diola-Fogny), spoken in south western Senegal by approximately half a million speakers, belongs to the Bak group of languages included in the Atlantic family (see Figure 1).<fnref n="1" />

<figure><img src="image_2.png" /></figure>

<footnote n="1">¹Jóola languages can be divided into Central Jóola, a dialect continuum within the limits of which it is difficult (if not impossible) to decide what is a language and what is a dialect, and peripheral Jóola varieties whose status as separate languages is hardly disputable, in spite of their close relationship to Central Jóola, such as Karon, Kwaataay, Mulomp-North, or Bayot. Jóola Fóoñi is part of the Central Jóola dialect continuum.</footnote>
<figure><img src="image_3.png" /></figure>

CC-BY Guillaume Segerer, Sebastian Nordhoff

<caption>Figure 1: Jóola Fóoñi and the other Jóola languages</caption>

Three overall presentations of Jóola Fóoñi grammar are available: Weiss (1939), Sapir (1965), and Hopkins (1995), but none of them includes a discussion of reflexive constructions. The available documentation on the reflexive constructions of Jóola Fóoñi is limited to a few examples of the use of the verbal suffixes -ɔ and -ɔɔrɔ, designated by Sapir (1965: 51) as “reflexive-descriptive” and “strong reflexive”, respectively. In particular, a crucial property of the suffix -ɔɔrɔ, namely the possibility of a non-reflexive use in which it marks self-intensification of the subject, has never been acknowledged before.
In a general way, we base our analysis of Jóola Fóoñi on a corpus of more
than twelve hours of recorded naturalistic texts of various genres.<fnref n="2" /> However, in
contrast to other morphosyntactic phenomena on which we already worked, and
for which our corpus provided abundant data, it turns out that reflexive construc-
tions are very rare in our corpus, and the analysis of reflexive constructions pre-
sented in this paper would not have been possible without systematic recourse
to elicitation. In fact, most of the examples we quote have been elicited. For this
purpose we used the questionnaire (Janic & Haspelmath 2023 [this volume]).

The article is organized as follows. §2 provides background information on Jóola Fóoñi morphosyntax. §3 describes the general principles underlying the expression of coreference within the clause in Jóola Fooñi, characterized by a sharp distinction between subject-object coreference, which requires verbal marking, and other configurations, which are not treated differently from coreference in discourse. §4 is on the reflexive and non-reflexive uses of the verbal suffixes involved in the coding of subject-object coreference. §5 gives additional precisions on the relationship between reflexivization and self-intensification, which constitutes a particularly original aspect of Jóola Fóoñi. §6 summarizes the main conclusions.

2 Background information on Jóola Fóoñi morphosyntax

**2.1 Clause structure**

2.1.1 Transitive-intransitive alignment

Like most of the languages of Subsaharan Africa, Jóola Fóoñi has a straight-
forward ‘nominative-accusative’ alignment system making it possible to define
a grammatical relation ‘subject’ on the basis of a set of properties shared by A
in the basic transitive construction and the sole argument of semantically mono-
valent verbs, and a grammatical relation ‘object’ on the basis of a set of proper-
ties that distinguish the P phrase in the basic transitive construction from noun
phrases fulfilling other roles.

2.1.2 Subjects, objects and obliques

Subjects and objects are equally unflagged. The most obvious property that dis-
tinguishes them is that subjects are indexed by means of verbal prefixes, whereas

<footnote n="2">²The texts have been transcribed by Boubacar Sambou (a graduate student in linguistics who is also a native speaker of the language), and analyzed by Alain Christian Bassène and Denis Creissels with the help of Boubacar Sambou.</footnote>
objects are indexed by means of verbal suffixes. Moreover, as illustrated in (1), with the verb forms lending themselves to subject indexation, the prefixed subject index is obligatory (even in the presence of a subject NP) whereas object indexation, conditioned by topicality, is equally optional with all verb forms.<fnref n="3" />

(1) a. *Eyɛnɛy*      *ɛrɔnrɔm*      *añulaw.*
      *ɛ-yɛn-ɛ-y*      *ɛ-rɔn-rɔm*      *a-ñul-a-w*
      SG-dog(E)-DEF-clE sI:clE-bite-RDPL SG-child(A)-DEF-clA
      ‘The dog bit the child.’

b. *ɛrɔmɔɔrɔm.*
      *ɛ-rɔm-ɔɔ-rɔm*
      sI:clE-bite-I:clA-RDPL
      ‘It (the dog) bit him (the child).’

Subject NPs consistently precede the verb. The unmarked position for object NPs and obliques is after the verb, as in (2a), but in case of focalization (marked by the use of special verb forms also used in relative clauses), they move to clause-initial position, as in (2b).

(2) a. *Nijɔsjɔk*      *Musaa.*
      n-ι-jʊ-jʊk        Musaa
      PPF-sI:1SG-see-RDPL Moussa(A)
      ‘I saw Moussa.’

b. *Musaa* nijɔskɔm.
      Musaa n-ι-jʊk-ʊ-m
      Moussa(A) PPF-sI:1SG-see-EP-ACT₁
      ‘It is Moussa that I saw.’

<footnote n="3">³Our transcription of the Jóola Fóoñi examples is a broad phonetic transcription that coincides with the official orthography as regards the notation of consonants, but departs from it in the notation of vowels, for which we follow the IPA conventions. This choice is motivated by the fact that the official orthography uses the acute accent to distinguish +ATR vowels from their –ATR counterparts, which may be confusing since accents are more commonly used to indicate word stress or tone. Phonological processes are responsible for variation in the form of some formatives. In particular, ATR harmony is responsible for variation in the vowels of most affixes, as illustrated by the non-subject index of class A, which depending on the context may surface as -ɔɔl, -ool, -ɔɔ, or -oɔ. Consonants in coda position are also often affected by phonological processes, as in *ɛrɔnrɔm* (1a), where the final consonant of *rɔm* ‘bite’ is modified in contact with the initial consonant of the reduplicative suffix, or in *nijɔsjɔk* (2a), where the final consonant of *jɔk* ‘see’ is deleted for the same reasons.</footnote>
Obliques are easy to distinguish from objects when they are introduced by a preposition, but unflagged obliques are relatively common in Jóola Fóoñi. However, their indexation properties distinguish them from objects: some obliques cannot be indexed at all, and for those lending themselves to indexation, contrary to objects, the choice of the index is not sensitive to the gender-number of the NP in oblique role, but only to its semantic role. For example, in (3a), *esukey* 'the village' is not flagged, which could suggest analyzing it as an object, but if it were the case, it should be possible to substitute the class E index -yɔ for it, since *esuk* 'village' governs class E agreement. The fact that, in this sentence, *esukey* can only be represented by the locative class index -bɔ, as in (3b), shows that it must be analyzed as an unflagged oblique rather than as an object.

(3) a. *Kujajaw* *esukey*.
    kʊ-ja-jaw e-suk-e-y
    sI:clBK-go-RDPL sg-village(E)-DEF-clE
    'They went to the village.'

b. *Esukey*, *kujajawbɔ*.
    e-suk-e-y kʊ-ja-jaw-bɔ
    sg-village(E)-DEF-clE sI:clBK-go-RDPL-I:clB
    'The village, they went there.'

In Jóola Fóoñi, there is no strict relative ordering of objects and obliques.

### 2.1.3 Transitivity prominence

Given that, in Jóola Fóoñi, transitivity is crucial in the conditioning of the expression of coreference within the clause, it is important to mention here that one of the salient typological characteristics of Jóola Fóoñi is its extremely high degree of transitivity prominence (i. e., a very strong tendency to extend transitive coding to verbs whose meaning departs from prototypical transitivity).

Creissels (forthcoming) proposes a questionnaire consisting of 30 verb meanings specially designed to evaluate the cross-linguistic variation in transitive prominence. The verb meanings that constitute this questionnaire are neither among those expressed by transitive verbs in (almost) all the languages for which the relevant data have been checked, nor among those that have a marked tendency to be expressed by verbs assigning other types of coding to their arguments.

Within the limits of this questionnaire, the ratio of transitive coding and other types of coding is for example 29.5 vs. 0.5 for Tswana (Bantu), 23 vs. 7 for Italian,
21 vs. 9 for Yoruba (Benue-Congo), 20.5 vs. 9.5 for Mandinka (Mande), 17 vs. 13 for Basque, 15.5 vs. 14.5 for Russian, 13 vs. 17 for Koroboro Senni (Songhay), and 3 vs. 27 for Akhvakh (Nakh-Daghestanian). Jóola Fóoñi, with a ratio of 29 vs. 1, is among the languages for which this questionnaire indicates an extremely high degree of transitivity prominence.

### 2.1.4 Multiple-object constructions and the coding of beneficiaries

Another salient characteristic of Jóola Fóoñi, which has consequences for the productivity of voice markers in the expression of coreference within the clause, is the remarkable productivity of multiple-object constructions. In particular, double-object constructions are used not only for semantically trivalent verbs such as *sɛn* ‘give’ or *yisen* ‘show’, but also for bivalent verbs to which an NP with the semantic role of beneficiary is added.

In contrast to most Atlantic languages, Jóola Fóoñi does not use the applicative strategy to encode beneficiaries,<fnref n="4" /> and does not have a benefactive adposition either: in Jóola Fóoñi, beneficiaries are simply encoded as objects that nothing distinguishes from the objects representing the P argument of transitive verbs. This results in the possibility of transitive constructions of semantically monovalent verbs, as in (4) with *jɔn* ‘set (speaking of the sun)’, and of double-object constructions of semantically bivalent verbs, as in (5) with *wɔnk* ‘call’.

(4) a. *Bɛgungɛb* di bɔɔnɛ: “ɛnɔjaa* pan bɔjɔn,
bɛ-gun-ɛ-b dI b-ɔɔnɛ ɛn-ɔ-jaa* pan bɔ-jɔn
SG-genius(B)-DEF-clB SEQ sI:clB-say sI:1SG.say-EP-HYP FUT sI:clB-set
pan bɔjɔn, bareɛ ɛn-ɔjaa* lɛɛ bɔjɔn, lɛɛ
pan bɔ-jɔn bareɛ ɛn-ɔ-jaa* lɛɛ bɔ-jɔn lɛɛ
FUT sI:clB-set but sI:1SG.say-EP-HYP FUT.NEG sI:clB-set FUT.NEG
bɔjɔn.”
bɔ-jɔn
sI:clB-set

‘Then the genius said: “If I say that it will set (balaab ‘the sun(B’), it will set, but if I say that it will not set, it will not set.”’

<footnote n="4">⁴Jóola Fóoñi has a single applicative marker (-um) exclusively used to license applied phrases with a prolative, instrumental, causal, motivative or mediative semantic role, which constitutes a typologically unusual situation.</footnote>
<table><tr><td>b.</td><td>/moorevvw</td><td>naanoo:</td><td>“Añulaw</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>v-moori-v-w</td><td>n-aan-vv</td><td>a-ñul-a-w</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>sg-marabout(A)-def-clA</td><td>ppf-sI:clA.say-I:clA</td><td>sg-child(A)-def-clA</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>umε, leε</td><td>bujonv.”</td><td></td></tr><tr><td></td><td>u-m-e leε</td><td>bujon-vv</td><td></td></tr><tr><td></td><td>dem-clA-prox fut.neq sI:clB-set-I:clA</td><td></td><td></td></tr></table>

'Then the marabout told her: "This child, he will die by this evening."'
lit. 'It (balaab 'the sun(B)') will not set (for) him.'

(5) a. Ntwənwənk Musaa añiilaw.
n-l-wən-wənk Musaa a-ñul-a-w
ppf-sI:1sg-call-rdpl Moussa(A) sg-child(A)-def-clA
'I called the child for Moussa.'

b. Ntwənkəələəwənk.
n-l-wənk-vv-l-vv-wənk
ppf-sI:1sg-call-I:clA-I:clA-rdpl
'I called him (for) him.'

Given that non-specific P arguments may simply be left unexpressed, the coding of beneficiaries as objects may give rise to ambiguities of the type illustrated in (6).

(6) Pan ipəsəəl.
pan l-pəs-vvəl
fut sl:1sg-wash-I:clA
'I'll wash him.' or 'I'll do the washing for him.'

## 2.2 Nouns and noun phrases

Jóola Fóoñi has a gender system of the type commonly found in Niger-Congo languages, especially among Bantu and Atlantic languages, characterized by a close relationship (which however does not boil down to a straightforward one-to-one correspondence) between the division of nouns into subsets according to the way they express the singular vs. plural distinction, and their division into subsets according to the agreement marks they control on their modifiers or on the pronouns that resume them.

In Jóola Fóoñi, each noun form is associated with one of thirteen possible agreement patterns, and genders can be defined as sets of nominal lexemes that are associated with the same agreement pattern both in the singular and the
plural. Agreement patterns and genders are conventionally designated here by capital letters that evoke the phonological form of the agreement markers. For example, ‘dog’ as a lexeme belongs to gender E/S, which means that the singular form ε-yɛn ‘dog’ is associated with the agreement pattern E (cf. ε-yɛn ε-cɛɛn ‘some dog’, ε-yɛn ε-cɪla ‘the aforementioned dog’, etc., to be compared for example with agreement pattern K in ka-laak kʊs-cɛɛn ‘some field’, ka-laak kʊs-cɪla ‘the aforementioned field’, etc.), whereas the corresponding plural form sɪ-yɛn is associated with the agreement pattern S (cf. sɪ-yɛn sɪ-cɛɛn ‘some dogs’, sɪ-yɛn sɪ-cɪla ‘the aforementioned dogs’, etc., to be compared with agreement pattern U in ʊ-laak ʊ-cɛɛn ‘some fields’, ʊ-laak ʊ-cɪla ‘the aforementioned fields’, etc.).

In our terminology, the term ‘class’ refers exclusively to cells in the morphological paradigm of adnominals and pronouns that can be the target of an agreement mechanism.<fnref n="5" /> For example, ε-cɛɛn is the class E form of the determiner -cɛɛn ‘some’, and sɪ-cɛɛn is the class S form of the same determiner.

The inflectional paradigm of adnominals and pronouns consists of 15 cells. 13 of them are involved in one of the 13 possible agreement patterns for noun forms (and are labeled by means of the same capital letter). The remaining two (class D and class N) are only used pronominally or adverbially with meanings that do not refer to any possible controller: vague reference to things for class D, and time for class N. For example, 13 of the 15 possible forms of the indefinite determiner -cɛɛn ‘some’ are found in constructions in which their prefix can be analyzed as an agreement marker (ε-yɛn ε-cɛɛn ‘some dog’, a-ñiil a-cɛɛn ‘some child’, u-bɛr u-cɛɛn ‘some trees’, kɛr-rumbɛ kʊs-cɛɛn ‘some pot’ etc.), but the morphological paradigm of -cɛɛn also includes two forms that do not correspond to any noun that could trigger their choice in an agreement mechanism, and can only be used pronominally (dɪ-cɛɛn ‘something’) or adverbially (nɪ-cɛɛn ‘sometimes’).

Gender A/BK (agreement pattern A in the singular, BK in the plural) coincides almost perfectly with the set of nouns denoting humans. The other genders are semantically heterogeneous.

Jóola Fóoñi has an enclitic definite article expressing class agreement with the noun to which it attaches.<fnref n="6" /> As illustrated in (7), attributive adjectives agree with their head in definiteness.

<footnote n="5">⁵For a detailed criticism of the way the term “class” is traditionally used in descriptions of Niger-Congo languages, the reader is referred to Güldemann & Fiedler (2017).</footnote>

<footnote n="6">⁶Depending on the stem to which it attaches, the first formative of the enclitic definite article may surface as -a-, -e-, -ɛ-, or -e-.</footnote>
(7) a. **bubeer** b̑eemɛk / bubeereb b̑eemɛkeb
bu-beer b-ɛemɛk / bu-beer-ɛ-b b-ɛemɛk-ɛ-b
sg-tree(B) clB-big sg-tree(B)-def-clB clB-big-def-clB
‘big tree’/‘the big tree’

b. **fal** f̑eemɛk / falaf f̑eemɛkef
f-al f-ɛemɛk / f-al-a-f f-ɛemɛk-ɛ-f
sg-river(F) clF-big sg-river(F)-def-clF clF-big-def-clF
‘big river’/‘the big river’

Within noun phrases, the general rule is that modifiers follow their head. However, adnominal possessors differ from the other noun modifiers in that they may optionally precede their head. As illustrated in (8), adnominal possessors that follow their head are usually introduced by the genitive linker -ati expressing the gender and number of the head, whereas adnominal possessors preceding their head are obligatorily resumed by an index suffixed to their head.

(8) a. **aseɛkaw** ati Musaa
a-seɛk-a-w Ø-ati Musaa
sg-woman(A)-def-clA clA-gen Moussa(A)
‘Moussa’s wife’, lit. ‘the wife that-of Moussa’

b. **Musaa** aseɛkɔɔ
Musaa a-seɛk-ɔɔl
Moussa(A) sg-woman(A)-I:clA
‘Moussa’s wife’, lit. ‘Moussa his wife’

## 2.3 Verb forms

With the exception of the imperative, in which the 2nd person prefix may optionally be deleted, the verb forms of Jóola Fóoñi consist minimally of a stem and a prefix. The stem may be a root (irreducible lexical element), or a root enlarged by one or more derivational suffixes.

According to the nature of their obligatory prefix, verb forms can be characterized MORPHOLOGICALLY as finite or non-finite:

* in finite verb forms, the obligatory prefix preceding the root is a subject index expressing the person (and in the 3rd person, the gender and number) of the subject argument;
* non-finite verb forms do not include a subject index, and their obligatory prefix characterizes them as belonging to one of the following three types of non-finite forms: infinitive, participle, or converb.

However, this morphological distinction does not coincide with the syntactic distinction between independent and dependent verb forms.

On the one hand, the relative verb forms, whose use is restricted to relative clauses and clauses in which a noun phrase or adverb is focalized, also include an obligatory subject index. They differ from the independent verb forms in the details of their TAM and polarity inflection. Independent verb forms may include TAM markers preceding the subject index, whereas the inflection of relative verb forms is purely suffixal, and includes a special paradigm of three ‘actualizers’ (glossed ACT) that have no equivalent in the inflection of independent verb forms.<fnref n="7" />

On the other hand, the non-finite verb forms as defined above, in addition to uses that justify the labels we use to designate them (infinitive, participle, and converb), can also be used by themselves (i. e., without having to combine with an auxiliary) as the nucleus of independent assertive clauses expressing TAM values distinct from those expressed by morphologically finite verb forms.

## 2.4 Personal pronouns and indexes

The inventory of personal pronouns and indexes is given in Tables 1 and 2. There is a single morphological paradigm of free pronouns, but two distinct paradigms of indexes. The forms given in these two tables are those that can be considered basic; depending on the contexts in which they occur, they may be modified by regular morphophonological processes.<fnref n="8" />

Note that:

* There is no dedicated subject index of 2^nd^ person plural. 2^nd^ person plural subjects are indexed by means of the class J index (*j*-), which can also be used optionally to index 1^st^ person plural subjects instead of the dedicated 1^st^ person plural index *v*-.

We do not know the historical explanation of the use of the class J index to represent speech act participants.

<footnote n="7">⁷The actualizers characterize the event to which the relative verb form refers as irrealis (ACT₀), realis (ACT₁), or having a close relationship with the time of utterance (ACT₀). The ACT₂ marker -ñaa results from the grammaticalization of the adverb ñaa ‘now’. In its presence, the incompletive aspect is interpreted as expressing present progressive, and the completive aspect is interpreted as expressing recent past.</footnote>

<footnote n="8">⁸In particular, in combination with +ATR stems, all the indexes whose underlying form includes a -ATR vowel undergo ATR harmony.</footnote>
<table><caption>Table 1: 1st and 2nd person pronouns and indexes</caption><thead><tr><th></th><th>Free pronouns</th><th>Subject indexes</th><th>Non-subject indexes</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>1SG</td><td>inje</td><td>ɪ-</td><td>-ɔm ~ -aam</td></tr><tr><td>2SG</td><td>aw</td><td>ʊ-</td><td>-ɪ</td></tr><tr><td>1PL.EXCL</td><td>uli ~ oli</td><td>ʊ-</td><td>-oli</td></tr><tr><td>1PL.INCL</td><td>walaal ~ ɔlaal</td><td>ʊ-...-aal</td><td>-ɔlaal</td></tr><tr><td>2PL</td><td>mʊyʊsl ~ mɪyʊsl</td><td>-</td><td>-ʊsl</td></tr></tbody></table>

<table><caption>Table 2: 3rd person pronouns and indexes</caption><thead><tr><th></th><th>Free pronouns</th><th>Subject indexes</th><th>Non-subject indexes</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>CL. A</td><td>ɔɔ</td><td>a-</td><td>-ɔɔl</td></tr><tr><td>CL. BK</td><td>k-ɔɔ ~ bʊk-ɔɔ</td><td>k-</td><td>-ɪl</td></tr><tr><td>CL. E</td><td>y-ɔɔ</td><td>ɛ-</td><td>-yɔ</td></tr><tr><td>CL. S</td><td>s-ɔɔ</td><td>s-</td><td>-sɔ</td></tr><tr><td>CL. F</td><td>f-ɔɔ</td><td>f-</td><td>-fɔ</td></tr><tr><td>CL. K</td><td>k-ɔɔ</td><td>k-</td><td>-kɔ</td></tr><tr><td>CL. B</td><td>b-ɔɔ</td><td>b-</td><td>-bɔ</td></tr><tr><td>CL. Ñ</td><td>ñ-ɔɔ</td><td>ñ-</td><td>-ñɔ</td></tr><tr><td>CL. U</td><td>w-ɔɔ</td><td>ʊ-</td><td>-wɔ</td></tr><tr><td>CL. J</td><td>j-ɔɔ</td><td>j-</td><td>-jɔ</td></tr><tr><td>CL. M</td><td>m-ɔɔ</td><td>m-</td><td>-mɔ</td></tr><tr><td>CL. T</td><td>t-ɔɔ</td><td>t-</td><td>-tɔ</td></tr><tr><td>CL. D'</td><td>d-oo ~ r-oo</td><td>d- ~ r-</td><td>-do ~ -rə</td></tr><tr><td>CL. D</td><td>d-ɔɔ ~ r-ɔɔ</td><td>Ø-</td><td>-dɔ ~ -rɔ</td></tr><tr><td>CL. N</td><td>n-ɔɔ</td><td>-</td><td>-nɔ</td></tr></tbody></table>
* The lack of subject index of class N is due to the fact that there is no noun
  triggering class N agreement, and class N forms are exclusively used as
  adverbs.

* Non-subject indexes can be suffixed not only to verbs, but also to nouns (as possessive indexes), to some adnominal particles, and to some adpositions.

* Non-subject indexes suffixed to verbs can index not only objects, but also some obliques. There is however an important distinction: as object indexes, they agree in gender-number with their antecedent, whereas oblique indexes are determined by the function of the oblique phrase they represent (for example, in object function, *esukey* 'the village' – gender E/S – is indexed by the E class index -yɔ, whereas the spatial adjunct *di esukey* 'in the village' is indexed by the class B index -bɔ).

As illustrated in (9b) (to be compared with the adpossessive construction in 9a), with the exception of the two unanalysable stems -umbe(em) (1st person singular possessive) and -uya (2nd person singular possessive), possessive pronouns (also used as possessive determiners) consist of a class prefix marking agreement with their antecedent or head (the possessee), a stem -ɔɔl- (glossed POSS), and a suffixed index representing the possessor.

(9) a. ṅwɔ̃saw wati fujicelɛf
       ṅ-wɔ̃-a-w w-ati fu-jicel-ɛ-f
       PL-ear(U)-DEF-CLU CLU-GEN SG-male.goat(F)-DEF-CLF
       ‘the ears of the male goat’

b. wɔɔlṣfɔ
w-ɔɔl-ṣ-fɔ
CLU-POSS-EP-I:CLF
lit. ‘those of it’ (possessee of class U, possessor of class F)

3 Coreference within the clause: general principles

Jóola Fóoñi does not have reflexive pronouns or indexes, and does not have lo-
gophorics or long-distance reflexives either. This means that coreference rela-
tionships within the clause that do not require verbal marking are not treated
differently from coreference in discourse, and the same applies to coreference
relationships across clause boundaries in complex constructions.
In the examples of coreference within the clause that we have been able to find
in our corpus or to elicit, the subject is most of the time one of the two terms of
the clause involved in the coreference relationship, and in all cases, the fact that
the subject is involved in a coreference relationship with another term of the
clause (object, oblique, or adpossessor) has no incidence on its coding.

The most salient characteristic of Jóola Fóoñi with respect to the expression
of coreference within the clause is a particularly clearcut distinction between
subject-object coreference and all other possible configurations, including sub-
ject-oblique coreference and subject-adpossessor coreference:

* Subject-object coreference obligatorily implies verbal marking by means of voice markers that reduce by one the number of objects with which the verb can combine.

* In all the other possible configurations, there is no verbal marking, and one of the two terms of the clause involved in the coreference relationship is encoded in the same way as if it resumed a referent to be retrieved from a previous sentence.

All the voice markers that may be involved in reflexivization have possible
functions other than the marking of reflexivization, and the verb forms they are
part of may be ambiguous between a reflexive reading and other interpretations.

Note that, given the very high degree of transitivity prominence of Jóola Fóoñi
and the extensive use of multiple-object constructions, subject-object corefer-
ence in Jóola Fóoñi often corresponds to other syntactic types of coreference in
other languages. In particular, with ditransitive verbs, agent-theme coreference
and agent-goal coreference are just particular cases of subject-object corefer-
ence, and when semantically plausible, are not treated differently from agent-
patient coreference with monotransitive verbs. Moreover, the fact that benefi-
ciaries are simply encoded as objects (see §2.1) results in that, in Jóola Fóoñi,
auto-benefaction (or agent-beneficiary coreference) is also a particular case of
subject-object coreference (see §4.2.4).

Subject-object coreference will be described in detail in §4. For the moment,
we limit ourselves to illustrating the following two principles:

* in all the possible coreference relationships within the clause other than subject-object coreference, one of the two terms is encoded by means of pronouns or indexes that are not specialized in the expression of coreference within the clause;
* the possibility of interpreting non-subject pronouns or indexes as having an antecedent within the clause is conditioned by the syntactic hierarchy subject > object > oblique.

In all the examples quoted in the remainder of this section to illustrate coreference relationships within the clause other than subject-object coreference, the pronoun coreferential with another term of the clause can in principle be also interpreted as resuming a referent to be retrieved from the context, although semantically, this latter interpretation is not always equally plausible, and is sometimes totally excluded for semantic reasons.

Example (10) shows that a possessive pronoun modifying an object may have the subject as its antecedent. The same possibility exists for adpossessor indexes attached to objects.

(10) Nawanwañ kalaakak kɔɔla.
n-a-wan-wañ ka-laak-a-k k-ɔɔl-a
PPF-sI:clA-cultivate-RDPL SG-field(K)-DEF-clK clK-POSS-I:clA
'Hei cultivated hisij field.'

This configuration (with an object modified by an adpossessor index or possessive pronoun resuming the subject) is in particular the configuration found with body-care verbs in constructions in which the object noun specifies the body part directly affected by the action, and the affected person is encoded as an adpossessor, as in (11). In such constructions, if the affected person is represented by a possessive pronoun or adpossessor index whose person-gender-number features coincide with those of subject, nothing indicates whether it must be understood as coreferential with the subject, or as resuming a referent to be retrieved from the context:<fnref n="9" />

(11) a. Nɛciciik fulɛmpɔɔl.
n-ɛ-cii-ciik fɔ-lɛmp-ɔɔl
PPF-sI:clA-shave-RDPL SG-beard(F)-I:clA
'Hei shaved hisij beard.'

b. Nakɔkɔf ukamunool.
n-a-kɔ-kɔf u-kɛmun-ool
PPF-sI:clA-scratch-RDPL PL-leg(U)-I:clA
'Hei scratched hisij legs.'

<footnote n="9">⁹The object of body-care verbs may also represent the affected person, and in that case, as can be expected from the general rules, coreference with the subject requires reflexive marking on the verb – see §4.3.2.</footnote>
Example (12) shows that an adpossessor index attached to an oblique may have the subject as its antecedent. In this particular example, a non-coreferential reading is ruled out by semantic considerations.

(12) *Najʊskujʊkʊbɔ*

n-a-jʊk-u-jʊk-ʊ-bɔ

**PPF-SI:clA-see-I:clBK-RDPL-EP-I:clB** **PREP PL-eye(K)-I:clA**

'Heᵢ saw them there with hisᵢ own eyes.'

Examples (13–14) illustrate the possibility that in multiple-object constructions, an adpossessor index or possessive pronoun included in an object phrase has another object as its antecedent.

(13) *Kat añulaw*

kat a-ñuul-a-w

leave sg-child(A)-DEF-clA mother(A)-I:clA

'Leave the childᵢ to hisᵢ/j mother.'

(14) *Nisancɛnɔɔsancɛn*

n-ɪ-sancɛn-ɔɔ-sancɛn

**PPF-SI:1SG-speak-I:clA-RDPL clM-POSS-I:clA**

'I spoke with him about him(self).'

lit. 'I told himᵢ hisᵢ/j (matter).'

Example (15) illustrates the possibility that a possessive pronoun modifying an oblique has an object as its antecedent.

(15) *Nijʊsjʊk*

n-ɪ-jʊs-jʊk

**PPF-SI:1SG-see-RDPL SG-thief(A)-DEF-clA** **PREP SG-house(E)-DEF-clE**

'yɔɔla.'

y-ɔɔl-a

clE-POSS-I:clA

'I saw the thiefᵢ in hisᵢ/j house.'

Example (16) shows that an oblique may be the antecedent of a possessive pronoun modifying another oblique.
(16) Nayabɔyabɔ d1 eniinɛɛw umɛ
n-a-yabɔ-yabɔ d1 ɛ-niinɛ-ɛ-w u-m-ɛ
PPF-sI:clA-get.married-RDPL PREP SG-man(A)-DEF-clA DEM-clA-PROX
mat1 sikoorɛɛs sɔɔla.
mat1 si-koori-ɛ-s s-ɔɔl-a
because.of PL-money(S)-DEF-clS clS-POSS-I:clA
‘She got married with this mani because of hisi money.’

Finally, examples (17–18) illustrate subject-oblique coreference.

(17) Najʊjʊk ewɛla bajand1 ɔɔ.
n-a-jʊs-jʊk ε-wɛla bajand1 Ø-ɔɔ
PPF-sI:clA-see-RDPL SG-snake(E) near clA-PRO
‘Hei saw a snake near him(self)ij/.’

(18) Najanjam kawɛl belemukool.
n-a-jan-jam ka-wɛl belemuk-ool
PPF-sI:clA-hear-RDPL SG-noise(K) behind-I:clA
‘Hei heard a noise behind himselfi.’

We have not been able to find examples of coreference relationship involving two objects in a multiple object construction, and speakers seem to avoid this configuration, as illustrated for example by the fact that ‘X showed Y to self (in the mirror)’ is rendered literally as ‘X showed Y his/her face (in the mirror)’, with the second term of the coreference relationship encoded as an adpossessor.

## 4 The verbal marking of coreference within the clause

As already mentioned in §3, in Jóola Fooñi, verbal marking by means of voice markers is obligatory in case of subject-object coreference, whereas no verbal marking can be observed in the other possible configurations. In §4.1, we briefly illustrate the reflexive use of the three voice markers involved in reflexive marking (-ɔɔrɔ, -ɔ and -ɔɔr). A detailed description of the reflexive and non-reflexive uses of each of them is provided in §4.2 (-ɔɔrɔ), §4.3 (-ɔ), and §4.4 (-ɔɔr).

### 4.1 The voice markers involved in reflexive marking

Jóola Fóoñi has six verbal suffixes involved in the marking of valency operations, and three of them are involved in reflexive marking:<fnref n="10" />

<footnote n="10">¹⁰The other three are -ɛn ‘causative’, -um ‘applicative’, and -i ‘passive’.</footnote>
• -ɔɔrɔ (~ -oorɔ in combination with +ATR verb roots), labeled “strong re-flexive” by Sapir (1965);

• -ɔ (~ -o in combination with +ATR verb roots), labeled “reflexive-descrip-tive” by Sapir (1965);

• -ɔɔr (~ -oor in combination with +ATR verb roots), labeled “reciprocal” by Sapir (1965).

The behavior of these three suffixes in the inflected forms of the verb including the reduplicative suffix provides decisive evidence that they must be analyzed as voice markers forming part the verb stem, rather than reflexive indexes.<fnref n="11" /> The point is that, as illustrated in (19c) for -ɔɔrɔ, they are systematically repeated in the inflected forms of the verb including the reduplicative suffix, like other derivational suffixes forming part of the stem, whereas object indexes occur just once (19a–19b), either before the reduplicative suffix (human object indexes) or after it (non-human object indexes).<fnref n="12" />

<table><tr><td>(19)</td><td>a. Εγενεγ<br>ε-γεν-ε-γ<br>SG-dog(E)-DEF-clE SI:clE-bite-RI-DPL-EP-I:clF<br>'The dog bit it (fujicelɛf 'the male goat').'</td><td>ερυνρυμυfɔ.<br>ε-rυn-rυm-ʊ-fɔ</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>b. Εγενεγ<br>ε-γεν-ε-γ<br>SG-dog(E)-DEF-clE SI:clE-bite-I:clA-RI-DPL<br>'The dog bit him (añulaw 'the child').'</td><td>ε-rυm-ɔɔ-rυm</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>c. Εγενεγ<br>ε-γεν-ε-γ<br>SG-dog(E)-DEF-clE SI:clE-bite-ɔɔRɔ-RI-DPL<br>'The dog bit itself.'</td><td>ε-rυm-ɔɔRɔ-ρυmɔɔRɔ</td></tr></table>

<footnote n="11">¹¹The reduplicative suffix cannot be analyzed as carrying a particular TAM value by itself, but it is an obligatory element of two non-relative forms of the verb expressing completive aspect and habitual aspect, respectively. It disappears in the corresponding relative forms, for example ku-ρε-ρεg 'they said' / ku-ρεg-ε-ρεg 'they say (habitually)' vs. ku-ρεg-ʊ-m 'that they said' (where -ʊ- is an epenthetic vowel) / ku-ρεg-ε-m 'that they say'.</footnote>

<footnote n="12">¹²In the presentation of the examples, the gloss REFL is avoided, because it might be a source of confusion, given that each of the suffixes involved in reflexivization also has non-reflexive uses.</footnote>
This unambiguously shows that, according to the classification of reflexivizers put forward by Haspelmath (2023 [this volume]), -ɔɔrɔ is a not a reflexive argument marker, since it cannot be described as alternating in the same slots as object indexes. The only possible interpretation of the data in (19) is that, in the morphological structure of verb forms, -ɔɔrɔ occupies a stem-internal slot (and is consequently repeated if the stem is reduplicated), as opposed to the stem-external slot occupied by object indexes, which in the same conditions are not repeated. Additional evidence is provided by a number of suffixes whose presence makes evident that -ɔɔrɔ does not alternate with object indexes. For example, the negative suffix -ʊt follows -ɔɔrɔ but precedes object indexes (as in ε-yɛn-ε-y-ε-rʊm-ɔɔrɔ-ʊt 'The dog did not bite itself' vs. ε-yɛn-ε-y-ε-rʊm-ʊt-ɔɔl 'The dog did not bite him (the child)'), and the same can be observed in the presence of -εɛn (past marker), -ʊlɔ (venitive marker), -ε (incompletive marker), or -aal (inclusive marker).

As regards their position with respect to the other formatives that constitute the verb forms of Jóola Fóoñi, -ɔ and -ɔɔr have exactly the same properties as -ɔɔrɔ. Accordingly, we conclude that, in the classification of reflexivizers put forward Haspelmath (2023 [this volume]), -ɔɔrɔ, -ɔɔ and -ɔɔr are bona fide reflexive voice markers.

In their reflexive function, these three suffixes equally reduce by one the number of objects compatible with the verb in its underived form, and the semantic correlate of this reduction is that the participant roles fulfilled by the subject and (one of) the object(s) in the construction of the base verb are cumulated by a single participant, encoded as the subject of the derived verb. This is illustrated in (20) for -ɔɔrɔ, in (21) for -ɔ, and in (22) for -ɔɔr.

(20) a. ∀niinɛɛw basɔfɛ epimbeney m'aabɔj
ɛ-niine-ɛ-w ba-sɔf-ɛ e-pimben-e-y man a-bɔj
SG-man(A)-DEF-clA CVB-catch-CVB SG-gun(E)-DEF-clE CSC SI:clA-kill
ɛkuutɛɛw.
ɛ-kuutɛ-ɛ-w
SG-thief(A)-DEF-clA
'The man took the gun and killed the thief.'

b. ∀niinɛɛw baraanɛ bɛɛbɛn m'aabɔjɔɔrɔ.
ɛ-niine-ɛ-w ba-raan-ɛ b-ɛɛbɛn man a-bɔj-ɔɔrɔ
SG-man(A)-DEF-clA CVB-drink-CVB SG-poison(B) CSC SI:clA-kill-ɔɔrɔ
'The man committed suicide (lit. 'killed himself') by drinking poison.'
(21) a. Nan alaañṣlɔm butab,
n-an a-laañ-ṣlɔ-m b-ut-a-b
clN-REL sI:clA-return-VEN-ACT₁ sg-rice.field(B)-DEF-clB
aseɛkaw napɔs añulaw.
a-seɛk-a-w n-a-pɔs a-ñul-a-w
SG-woman(A)-DEF-clA PPF-sI:clA-wash SG-child(A)-DEF-clA
'After returning from the rice field, the woman washed the child.'

b. Nan alaañṣlɔm butab,
n-an a-laañ-ṣlɔ-m b-ut-a-b
clN-REL sI:clA-return-VEN-ACT₁ sg-rice.field(B)-DEF-clB
aseɛkaw napɔsɔ.
a-seɛk-a-w n-a-pɔs-ɔ
SG-woman(A)-DEF-clA PPF-sI:clA-wash-ɔ
'After returning from the rice field, the woman washed (herself).'

(22) a. Ꭺar ፓmbanjaf man uguuy añulaw.
ŋar ፓ-mbanj-a-f man u-guuy a-ñul-a-w
take sg-blanket(F)-DEF-clF CSC sI:2sg-cover SG-child(A)-DEF-clA
'Take the blanket and cover the child (with it).'

b. Ꭺar ፓmbanjaf man uguuyoor.
ŋar ፓ-mbanj-a-f man u-guuy-oor
take sg-blanket(F)-DEF-clF CSC sI:2sg-cover-ɔɔr
'Take the blanket and cover yourself (with it).'

However, none of these three suffixes is specialized in reflexive marking. Moreover, as reflexivizers, they are not interchangeable, and their non-reflexive uses are very different.

## 4.2 Reflexive and non-reflexive uses of -ɔɔrɔ

### 4.2.1 -ɔɔrɔ as the default marker of subject-object coreference

The verbal suffix -ɔɔrɔ can be analyzed as the default marker of subject-object coreference, freely available for the transitive verbs that do not belong to a restricted semantic class of transitive verbs that regularly mark subject-object coreference by means of -ɔ (see §4.3), and are not lexically specified as marking subject-object coreference by means of -ɔ or -ɔɔr (see §4.3–§4.4).
### 4.2.2 -ɔɔrɔ and the coding of A-P coreference

The reflexive use of -ɔɔrɔ has already been illustrated above with rum-ɔɔrɔ 'bite oneself' in (19c) and bezj-ɔɔrɔ 'kill oneself' in (20b). Examples (23–25) further illustrate the use of -ɔɔrɔ to derive intransitive verbs expressing agent-patient coreference, and more generally, coreference between the core arguments of monose transitive verbs.

(23) An acɛsɔɔrɛtɔɔl, ɔɔ
an a-cɛsɔɔr-ʊt-ɔɔl Ø-ɔɔ
person(A) sI:clA-chase.away-NEG-I:clA clA-PRO
acɛsɔɔrɔɔrɛ.
a-cɛsɔɔr-ɔɔrɔ-ɛ
sI:clA-chase.away-ɔɔrɔ-COMPL
'Nobody chased him away, he himself decided to leave.'
lit. 'it's him who chased himself away'

(24) Nəŋɔɔlɛn nəŋɔɔlɛn apacɛn bɛ́kaakɔ́, bare
n-a- nəŋɔɔlɛn- nəŋɔɔlɛn a-pacɛn bɛ́k-aa-kɔ́ bare
PPF-sI:clA-be.able-REDPL sI:clA-save clBK-other-clBK but
a- nəŋɔɔlɛn-ʊt apacɛn-ɔɔrɔ.
a- nəŋɔɔlɛn-ʊt a-pacɛn-ɔɔrɔ
sI:clA-be.able-NEG sI:clA-save-ɔɔrɔ
'He was able to save the others, but not to save himself.'

(25) Anɔɔsan atɛbɛnɔɔrɔm, Atijamit pan awalɛnɔɔl,
Ø-anɔɔsan a-tɛbɛn-ɔɔrɔ-m Atijamit pan a-walɛn-ɔɔl
clA-any sI:clA-lift.up-ɔɔrɔ-ACT₁ God(A) FUT sI:clA-bring.down-I:clA
bare anɔɔsan awalɛnɔɔrɔm, Atijamit pan
bare Ø-anɔɔsan a-walɛn-ɔɔrɔ-m Atijamit pan
but clA-any sI:clA-bring.down-ɔɔrɔ-ACT₁ God(A) FUT
atɛbɛnɔɔl.
a-tɛbɛn-ɔɔl
sI:clA-lift.up-I:clA
'Whoever exalts himself, God will humble him, but whoever humbles
himself, God will exalt him.' (from the Jóola Fóoñi translation of the New
Testament)

In our data, the coding of A-P coreference by means of -ɔɔrɔ is attested by the verbs listed in Table 3.<fnref n="13" />

<footnote n="13">¹³In the case of polysemous verbs, the translation of the base verb given in this table is that corresponding to the meaning of the reflexive derivate attested in our data.</footnote>
<table><caption>Table 3: Verbs attesting the use of -ɔɔrɔ to mark A-P coreference</caption><thead><tr><th>Reflexive verb</th><th>Base verb</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>bɛbɛn-ɔɔrɔ</td><td>bɛbɛn 'calm s.o. down'</td></tr><tr><td>buken-ooro</td><td>buken 'hurt s.o.'</td></tr><tr><td>bɔj-ɔɔrɔ</td><td>bɔj 'kill s.o.'</td></tr><tr><td>bɔnt-ɔɔrɔ</td><td>bɔnt 'fool s.o.'</td></tr><tr><td>cɛsɔɔr-ɔɔrɔ</td><td>cɛsɔɔr 'chase s.o. away'</td></tr><tr><td>gamɛn-ɔɔrɔ</td><td>gamɛn 'judge s.o.'</td></tr><tr><td>jɛl-ɔɔrɔ</td><td>jɛl 'insult s.o.'</td></tr><tr><td>jʊk-ɔɔrɔ</td><td>jʊk 'see s.o.'</td></tr><tr><td>jʊṣr-ɔɔrɔ</td><td>jʊṣr 'look at s.o.'</td></tr><tr><td>kambɛn-ɔɔrɔ</td><td>kambɛn 'lock s.o.'</td></tr><tr><td>kɛvɛnum-ooro</td><td>kɛvɛnum 'take care of s.o.'</td></tr><tr><td>lat-ɔɔrɔ</td><td>lat 'hate s.o.'</td></tr><tr><td>maŋ-ɔɔrɔ</td><td>maŋ 'know s.o.'</td></tr><tr><td>maŋ-ɔɔrɔ</td><td>maŋ 'like s.o.'</td></tr><tr><td>nag-ɔɔrɔ</td><td>nag 'hit s.o.'</td></tr><tr><td>pacɛn-ɔɔrɔ</td><td>pacɛn 'save s.o.'</td></tr><tr><td>pɛjul-ooro</td><td>pɛjul 'separate s.o. out'</td></tr><tr><td>rambɛn-ɔɔrɔ</td><td>rambɛn 'help s.o.'</td></tr><tr><td>rʊm-ɔɔrɔ</td><td>rʊm 'bite s.o.'</td></tr><tr><td>sal-ɔɔrɔ</td><td>sal 'praise s.o.'</td></tr><tr><td>tɛbɛn-ɔɔrɔ</td><td>tɛbɛn 'glorify s.o.'</td></tr><tr><td>walɛn-ɔɔrɔ</td><td>walɛn 'humiliate s.o.'</td></tr></tbody></table>

### 4.2.3 -ɔɔrɔ and the coding of agent-goal coreference

Given the extensive use of multiple-object constructions in Jóola Fóoñi, with ditransitive verbs, agent-goal coreference is a particular case of subject-object coreference, and is consequently productively encoded by means of -ɔɔrɔ, examples (26–27).

(26) ʊjʊk, aw faŋi nɔlanlaañ ʊmɛrulooro.
ʊ-jʊk aw faŋ-ɪ n-ʊ-lan-laañ u-merul-ooro
sI:2sg-look 2sg.pro self-2sg pPF-sI:2sg-return-RDPL sI:2sg-answer-ɔɔrɔ
‘Look, you answered your own question yourself again.’
lit. ‘Look, you answered yourself again.’
(27) Nīmammāŋ man ṁenəərə kūnak kufeeji man
n-ī-mam-maŋ man ṁ-en-əərə kū-nak ku-feeji man
PPF-sI:1SG-want-RDPL CSC sI:2SG-give-əərə PL-day(K) clK-three CSC
vəwənəər jak.
v-wənəər jak
sI:2SG-think well

'I would like you to give yourself three days to think about it well.'

### 4.2.4 -əərə and the coding of agent-beneficiary coreference

The suffix -əərə is also productively used to encode autobenefaction (i. e., agent-beneficiary coreference), examples (28–29). This is consistent with the fact that, in Jóola Fóoñi, beneficiaries are simply encoded as objects.

(28) a. Nīnɔɔmɛ aseɛkom ewoto.
n-ī-nɔɔm-ɛ a-seɛk-ɔm e-woto
PPF-sI:1SG-buy-COMPL SG-woman(A)-I:1SG SG-car(E)
'I bought a car for my wife.'

b. Nīnɔɔməərəɛ ewoto.
n-ī-nɔɔm-əərə-ɛ e-woto
PPF-sI:1SG-buy-əərə-COMPL SG-car(E)
'I bought a car for myself.'

(29) a. Fək iñɛs añɔɔlɔm aseɛk.
fək i-ñɛs a-ñɔɔl-ɔm a-seɛk
OBLG sI:1SG-look.for SG-child(A)-I:1SG SG-woman(A)
'I must look for a wife for my son.'

b. Fək iñɛsəərə asεɛk.
fək i-ñɛs-əərə a-seɛk
OBLG sI:1SG-look.for-əərə SG-woman(A)
'I must look for a wife for myself.'

### 4.2.5 -əərə as a marker of self-intensification of the subject

As a valency operator, -əərə is exclusively used to encode reflexivization in one of the configurations illustrated in the previous sections. However, in addition to its use as the default marker of subject-object coreference, -əərə is also productively used as a marker of SELF-INTENSIFICATION OF THE SUBJECT. In this use, -əərə has no incidence on the valency properties of the verb to which it attaches, and its
contribution to the meaning of the clause corresponds to that more commonly expressed cross-linguistically by free intensifying self-forms having scope on the subject, as in *John HIMSELF* *came* or *John came HIMSELF*.<fnref n="14" />

In its function of self-intensification of the subject, -ɔɔrɔ can attach to intransitive verbs, as in (30).

(30) Inje ijawɔɔrɔɛ bɛɛbɔ.
inje ɪ-jaw-ɔɔrɔ-ɛ bɛɛ-bɔ
1SG.PRO sI:1SG-go-ɔɔrɔ-COMPL ALL-I:clB
'It's me who went there in person.'

With intransitive verbs, the only possible ambiguity is between self-intensification of the subject and autobenefaction.

With transitive verbs, the choice between the possible interpretations of -ɔɔrɔ (coreference between the subject and another core argument, autobenefaction, or self-intensification of the subject) is partly conditioned by the presence vs. absence of object NPs or indexes. However, the choice between an autobenefactive reading and a self-intensification reading can only rely on the context, since in the autobenefactive use of ɔɔrɔ-verbs, the valency operation is not apparent. For example, in (31a), kambɛn-ɔɔrɔ is interpreted as encoding agent-patient coreference ('lock self'). In (31b), the presence of the object index -kɔ excludes this possibility, but the first part of the sentence is decisive for the choice between the two possible readings 'close s.th. for self' (autobenefactive) and 'close s.th. oneself' (self-intensification of subject).

(31) a. Jaw ʊkambɛnɔɔrɔ dɪ kalɪmbɪsak man ʊwʊraŋ.
jaw ʊ-kambɛn-ɔɔrɔ dɪ ka-lɪmbɪs-a-k man ʊ-wʊraŋ
go sI:2SG-close-ɔɔrɔ PREP SG-room(K)-DEF-clK CSC sI:2SG-undress
'Go and lock yourself in the room to change your clothes.'

b. Nɛɛnɔɔ akambɛn kajʊnkʊtak, naanɛ
n-ɛɛn-ɔɔ a-kambɛn ka-jʊnkʊt-a-k n-aanɛ
PPF-sI:1SG.tell-I:clA sI:clA-close SG-door(K)-DEF-clK PPF-sI:clA.tell
ijaw ikambɛnɔɔrɔkɔ.
ɪ-jaw ɪ-kambɛn-ɔɔrɔ-kɔ
sI:1SG-go sI:1SG-close-ɔɔrɔ-I:clK

'I told him to close the door, and he told me to go and close it myself.'

<footnote n="14">¹⁴On the general question of the relationship between self-intensification and reflexivization in typological perspective, readers are referred to Gast & Siemund (2006), König & Gast (2006), and references therein.</footnote>
In the case of *rɛg-ɔɔrɔ* < rɛg ‘tell’, the possibility of a reflexive interpretation is widely attested in our data. In Jóola Fóoñi, as in many other languages, ‘think’ or ‘imagine’ can be expressed as lit. ‘tell to self’, but in (32), the context is hardly compatible with the agent-addressee coreference reading, leaving self-intensification as the only plausible reading.

(32) Uceŋŋɔɔl, ɔɔ let añul, pan aŋoolɛn
ʊ-cɛɛn-ɔɔl Ø-ɔɔ Ø-let a-ñul pan a-ŋɔɔlɛn
sI:2sg-ask-I:clA clA-pro sI:clD-not.to.be sg-child(A) fut sI:clA-be.able
arɛgɔɔrɔ.
a-rɛg-ɔɔrɔ
sI:clA-tell-ɔɔrɔ

‘Ask him, he is not a child, he will be able to tell (it) himself.’

Examples (33–36) provide further illustrations of the role of the context in the interpretation of -ɔɔrɔ as expressing autobenefaction or self-intensification of the subject.

(33) a. Anaw, tanɔɔsan ulakɔɛ, ñɛs man
an-a-w t-anɔɔsan u-lakɔ-ɛ ñɛs man
person(A)-DEF-clA clT-any sI:2sg-be-ACT0 try CSC
ukaanɔɔrɔ karɛɛs kajake.
u-kaan-ɔɔrɔ ka-rɛɛs k-a-jak-ɛ
sI:2sg-make-ɔɔrɔ sg-name(K) clK-PTCP-be.good-ACT0
‘Wherever you may be, try to build a good reputation (for yourself).’

b. Nan ubajɔt arambɛna, fɔk ukaanɔɔrɔ
nan u-baj-u-t a-rambɛna fɔk u-kaan-ɔɔrɔ
if sI:2sg-have-NEG sg-helper(A) OBLG sI:2sg-make-ɔɔrɔ
bʊrɔkab buya.
b-u-rɔk-a-b b-u-ya
sg-work(B)-DEF-clB clB-your

‘If you have nobody to help you, you must do your work yourself.’

(34) a. Fɔk ìñɛsɔɔrɔ aɛɛk.
fɔk t-ñɛs-ɔɔrɔ a-sɛɛk
OBLG sI:1sg-look.for-ɔɔrɔ sg-woman(A)
‘I must look for a wife (for) myself.’
<table><tr><td>b. Ampaɔm</td><td>naanɛ</td><td>man añɛsɔm</td></tr><tr><td>a-mpa-ɔm</td><td>n-aanɛ</td><td>man a-ñɛs-ɔm</td></tr><tr><td>sg-father(A)-I:1sg</td><td>ppf-sI:clA</td><td>say CSC sI:clA-look.for-I:1sg</td></tr><tr><td>aseɛk,</td><td>barɛ inje</td><td>nɛɛnɔɔ</td><td>pan</td></tr><tr><td>a-seɛk</td><td>barɛ inje</td><td>n-ɛɛn-ɔɔ</td><td>pan</td></tr><tr><td>sg-woman(A) but</td><td>1sg.PRO</td><td>ppf-sI:1sg</td><td>say-I:clA fut</td></tr><tr><td>ñɛsɔɔrɔ.</td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>ɪ-ñɛs-ɔɔrɔ</td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>sI:1sg-look.for-ɔɔrɔ</td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr></table>

‘My father said he would look for a wife for me, but I told him that I will look for (a wife) myself.’

<table><tr><td>(35)</td><td>Nan</td><td>aseɛkɔm</td><td>vsumutum,</td><td>inje</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>n-an</td><td>a-seɛk-ɔm</td><td>v-sumut-u-m</td><td>inje</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>clN-REL</td><td>sg-woman(A)-I:1sg</td><td>sI:clA-be.sick-EP-ACT<sub>1</sub></td><td>1SG.PRO</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>kɛsiilooro.</td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td></td><td>kɛ-siil-ooro</td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td></td><td>inf(K)-cook-ɔɔrɔ</td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td></td><td colspan="4">‘When my wife is sick, I do the cooking myself.’</td></tr></table>

<table><tr><td>(36)</td><td>Elɔvpey</td><td>yati</td><td>ñaam</td><td>umbɛ, inje</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>ɛ-lɔv-p-ɛ-y</td><td>y-atı</td><td>ñaam</td><td>Ø-umbɛ inje</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>sg-house(E)-DEF-clE</td><td>clE-GEN</td><td>mother(A)</td><td>clA-my</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>itɛɛpɔɔrɔɛyɔ.</td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td></td><td>ɪ-tɛɛp-ɔɔrɔ-ɛ-yɔ</td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td></td><td>sI:1sg-build-ɔɔrɔ-COMPL-I:clE</td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td></td><td colspan="4">‘My mother’s house, I built it myself.’</td></tr></table>

However, it may also happen that the lexical meaning of the verb helps to solve the ambiguity. For exemple *manj-ɔɔrɔ* < *manj* ‘know’ may be used with the reflexive reading ‘know oneself’, but in (37), the presence of a complement clause excludes this possibility, and the self-intensification reading is the only one really available, since semantically, an autobenefactive interpretation is difficult to imagine.

<table><tr><td>(37)</td><td>Inje</td><td>nɪmanjɔɔrɔmanjɔɔrɔ</td><td>man</td><td>ijɛɛm</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>inje</td><td>n-ɪ-manj-ɔɔrɔ-manjɔɔrɔ</td><td>m-an</td><td>ɪ-ja-ɛ-m</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>1SG.PRO</td><td>ppf-sI:1sg-know-ɔɔrɔ-RDPL</td><td>clM-REL</td><td>sI:1sg-go-ICOMPL-ACT<sub>1</sub></td></tr></table>
b'ɛɛkaanɛy.

bɛɛ ε-kaan-ε-y

ALL INF(E)-do-DEF-clE

‘I myself know how I will do (that).’

### 4.2.6 The lexicalization of ɔɔrɔ-derivates

As a rule, ɔɔrɔ-derivates are semantically transparent. In this respect, -ɔɔrɔ be-haves very differently from the other two suffixes involved in the expression of reflexivization, which have a marked tendency toward lexicalization.

There are, however, a few ɔɔrɔ-derivates with a lexicalized meaning. For ex-ample, sɔf-ɔɔrɔ is attested with two meanings, ‘strive to do s.th.’ and ‘keep from doing s.th.’, which cannot be straightforwardly predicted from the meaning of the base verb sɔf ‘catch’, although it is not very difficult to imagine how they developed from ‘catch self’.

Tɛb-ɔɔrɔ ‘invite oneself’ (in the sense of ‘go s.wh. without having been called’) < tɛb ‘carry’ is another example of lexicalization of an ɔɔrɔ-derivate.

## 4.3 Reflexive and non-reflexive uses of -ɔ

### 4.3.1 The reflexive use of -ɔ with body-care verbs

As already illustrated by (21) (reproduced here as 38), the verbal suffix -ɔ is used to express a reflexive meaning with body-care verbs, if no particular body part is mentioned and the object represents the person affected by the action (for body-care verbs with a body-part noun in object role, see §3).

(38) a. Nan alaañʊlɔm butab,
n-an a-laañ-ʊlɔ-m b-ut-a-b
clN-REL sI:clA-return-VEN-ACT₁ SG-rice.field(B)-DEF-clB
a-seɛkaw napɔs añulaw.
a-seɛk-a-w n-a-pɔs a-ñul-a-w.
SG-woman(A)-DEF-clA PPF-sI:clA-wash SG-child(A)-DEF-clA
‘After returning from the rice field, the woman washed the child.’

b. Nan alaañʊlɔm butab,
n-an a-laañ-ʊlɔ-m b-ut-a-b
clN-REL sI:clA-return-VEN-ACT₁ SG-rice.field(B)-DEF-clB
<table><tr><td>aseekaw</td><td>napɔsɔ.</td></tr><tr><td>a-seek-a-w</td><td>n-a-pɔs-ɔ</td></tr><tr><td>sg-woman(A)-def-clA</td><td>ppf-sI:clA-wash-ɔ</td></tr></table>

'After returning from the rice field, the woman washed (herself).'

In our data, the reflexive use of -ɔ with body-care verbs is attested by the verbs listed in Table 4.

<table><caption>Table 4: Body-care verbs attesting the reflexive use of -ɔ</caption><thead><tr><td>Reflexive verb</td><td>Base verb</td></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>bsŋ-ɔ 'braid (self)'</td><td>bɔŋ 'braid (s.th., or s.o. else)'</td></tr><tr><td>ciik-ɔ 'shave (self)'</td><td>ciik 'shave (s.th., or s.o. else)'</td></tr><tr><td>kaan-ɔ 'put (clothes) on self'</td><td>kaan 'put (clothes) on s.o. else'</td></tr><tr><td>kɔk-ɔ 'tie cloth around the waist'</td><td>kɔk 'tie (s.th.)'</td></tr><tr><td>n̥aaw-ɔ 'bathe (self)'</td><td>n̥aaw 'bathe (s.o. else)'</td></tr><tr><td>pɔs-ɔ 'wash (self)'</td><td>pɔs 'wash (s.th., or s.o. else)'</td></tr></tbody></table>

In all cases, it is also possible to have -ɔɔrɔ instead of -ɔ, as in (39).

<table><tr><td>(39)</td><td>Añulaw</td><td>nrindiiŋ</td><td>tembe yatı</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>a-ñul-a-w</td><td>n-ɛ-rin-diiŋ</td><td>tembe y-atı</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>sg-child(A)-def-clA</td><td>ppf-sI:clA-reach-rDPL</td><td>time(E) clE-GEN</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>kapɔsɔɔrɔ.</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td></td><td>ka-pɔs-ɔɔrɔ</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td></td><td>inf(K)-wash-ɔɔrɔ</td><td></td><td></td></tr></table>

'The child is old enough to be able to wash himself.'

The use of -ɔɔrɔ instead of -ɔ adds to the reflexive meaning an intensifying nuance. Consequently, a possible analysis is that -ɔ is still present underlyingly, but for phonetic reasons, the addition of -ɔɔrɔ to mark self-intensification of the subject makes it invisible.

### 4.3.2 The reflexive use of -ɔ: isolated cases

In addition to body-care verbs, for which the suffixation of -ɔ is the regular and semantically unmarked way to encode subject-object coreference, -ɔ is used in reflexive function, without any obvious explanation, in the two verb pairs given in Table 5, one of which is formally an equipollent pair.

There may be other similar cases, but these are the only ones we came across.
<table><caption>Table 5: Other verbs attesting the reflexive use of -ɔ</caption><thead><tr><th>Reflexive verb</th><th>Corresponding non-reflexive verb</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>lɪb-ɔ 'cut self'</td><td>lɪb 'cut'</td></tr><tr><td>rɔɔk-ɔ 'carry on one's head'</td><td>rɔɔk-ɛn 'load s.th. onto s.th.'</td></tr></tbody></table>

### 4.3.3 The quasi-reflexive use of -ɔ

Jóola Fóoñi has several verbs of spontaneous motion that are formally related to a verb of caused motion in one of the following two ways:

* either the spontaneous-motion verb derives from the caused-motion verb via the addition of -ɔ (Table 6),

* or the spontaneous-motion and caused-motion verbs share a root not attested by itself as a verb stem, the spontaneous-motion verb being derived from this root via the addition of -ɔ, and the caused-motion verb via the addition of the causative suffix -ɛn (Table 7).<fnref n="15" />

<table><caption>Table 6: Spontaneous-motion verbs derived from the corresponding caused-motion verb via the addition of -ɔ</caption><thead><tr><th>Spontaneous-motion verb</th><th>Caused-motion verb</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>fim-o 'turn over on one's stomach'</td><td>fim 'turn over (pot)'</td></tr><tr><td>jup-o 'embark'</td><td>jup 'load s.th.up, insert into'</td></tr><tr><td>lak-ɔ 'sit down'</td><td>lak 'put (a pot) on the fire'</td></tr><tr><td>rup-o 'emerge from'</td><td>rup 'pull s.th. up'</td></tr><tr><td>wɛɛt-ɔ 'lie on back'</td><td>wɛɛt 'spread out'</td></tr></tbody></table>

This use of -ɔ can be deemed QUASI-REFLEXIVE, since the relationship between caused motion and spontaneous motion shares important characteristics with the relationship between two-participant events and the corresponding reflexive events, but nevertheless differs from it in some respects. For example, a person who is standing up cannot be described as performing on him/herself the

<footnote n="15">¹⁵In the case of *wal-ɛn* ‘set down’, it is interesting to observe the contrast between *wal-ɔ* ‘get down’ and *wal-ɛn-ɔɔr* lit. ‘bring self down’ > ‘humble self’, as in (25).</footnote>
<table><caption>Table 7: Spontaneous-motion verbs marked by -ɔ corresponding to caused-motion verbs marked by -ɛn</caption><thead><tr><th>Spontaneous-motion verb</th><th>Caused-motion verb</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>fint-ɔ 'lie down'</td><td>fint-ɛn 'make lie down'</td></tr><tr><td>ñit-ɔ 'climb'</td><td>ñit-ɛn 'hoist up'</td></tr><tr><td>pan-ɔ 'move aside (intr.)</td><td>pan-ɛn 'move aside (tr.)'</td></tr><tr><td>tink-o 'lean (intr.)'</td><td>tink-ɛn 'tilt, bow'</td></tr><tr><td>wal-ɔ 'get down'</td><td>wal-ɛn 'set down'</td></tr><tr><td>yt-ɔ 'get up, stand up'</td><td>yt-ɛn 'lift s.th. up'</td></tr></tbody></table>

same action as when raising another person or an object. However, the use of lit. ‘raise oneself’ in the sense of ‘stand up’ is attested in a number of unrelated languages, and this extension of reflexive marking to verbs of spontaneous motion has a clear semantic motivation in that a person who is standing up is the instigator of an event whose manifestations concern exclusively his/her own body.

This can be captured by introducing the notion of QUASI-REFLEXIVITY (or AUTOCausATIVITY in Geniušienė’s (1987) terminology) for the following type of relationship between verbs encoding one- and two-participant events:

* the action performed by the unique participant in the one-participant event manifests itself in the same way and has the same result as if it were the affected participant in the two-participant event;

* the unique participant in the one-participant event acts consciously and voluntarily, but in a way that cannot be assimilated to the action performed by the agentive participant in the two-participant event.

In addition to the motion verbs listed above, the use of -ɔ in the verb pairs in Table 8 meets the definition of quasi-reflexivity.

<table><caption>Table 8: Quasi-reflexive uses of -ɔ with verbs that are not motion verbs</caption><thead><tr><th>Quasi-reflexive verb</th><th>Base verb</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>yɔf-ɔ 'hide self'</td><td>yɔf 'hide s.th. or s.o.'</td></tr><tr><td>yokul-o 'take a rest'</td><td>yokul 'allow s.o. to rest'</td></tr></tbody></table>
### 4.3.4 The decausative use of -ɔ

As illustrated by the verb pairs in Table 9, in addition to its reflexive and quasi-reflexive use, the verbal suffix -ɔ is fully productive in decausative (or ‘anticausative’) function.

<table><caption>Table 9: Examples of verbs attesting the decausative use of -ɔ</caption><thead><tr><th>Decausative verb</th><th>Base verb</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>bɛmbul-o 'open (intr.)'</td><td>bɛmbul 'open (tr.)'</td></tr><tr><td>bɛnɛn-ɔ 'increase (intr.)'</td><td>bɛnɛn 'increase (tr.)'</td></tr><tr><td>fɔm-ɔ 'break (intr.)'</td><td>fɔm 'break (tr.)'</td></tr><tr><td>gumbul-o 'diminish (intr.)'</td><td>gumbul 'diminish (tr.)'</td></tr><tr><td>jɪs-ɔ 'tear (intr.)'</td><td>jɪs 'tear (tr.)'</td></tr><tr><td>liw-o 'wake up'</td><td>liw 'wake s.o. up'</td></tr><tr><td>loopul-o 'come off'</td><td>loopul 'take off'</td></tr><tr><td>etc.</td><td></td></tr></tbody></table>

In Jóola Fóoñi, -ɔ is not used productively in passive or resultative function, but it is possible to find sporadic cases of transitive verbs whose ɔ-derivate has a passive or resultative rather than decausative meaning. Those we came across are listed in Table 10.

<table><caption>Table 10: Verbs attesting a passive or resultative use of -ɔ</caption><thead><tr><th>Passive or resultative verb</th><th>Base verb</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>wot-o 'be known'</td><td>wot 'know'</td></tr><tr><td>kɔr-ɔ 'be well-mannered'</td><td>kɔr 'educate'</td></tr><tr><td>yab-ɔ 'get married (speaking of a woman)'</td><td>yab 'marry'</td></tr></tbody></table>

### 4.3.5 Lexicalized uses of -ɔ

The lexicalization of ɔ-derivates can be illustrated by the verb pairs in Table 11.
<table><caption>Table 11: Examples of verbs attesting lexicalized uses of -ɔ</caption><thead><tr><th>Lexicalized derivate</th><th>Base verb</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>baj-ɔ 'exist' or 'have time'</td><td>baj 'have'</td></tr><tr><td>jam-ɔ 'be famous'</td><td>jam 'hear'</td></tr><tr><td>bɔl-ɔ 'burn self'</td><td>bɔl 'grill, roast'</td></tr><tr><td>kɔk-ɔ 'be unlucky'</td><td>kɔk 'tie s.th. up'</td></tr><tr><td>etc.</td><td></td></tr></tbody></table>

## 4.4 Reflexive and non-reflexive uses of -ɔɔr

### 4.4.1 The reflexive and quasi-reflexive use of -ɔɔr

The reflexive use of -ɔɔr has been illustrated by (22), reproduced here as (40).

(40) a. አar ፍmbanjaf man uguuy añulaw.
    አar ፍ-mbanj-a-f man u-guuy a-ñul-a-w
    take SG-blanket(F)-DEF-CLF CSC sI:2SG-cover SG-child(A)-DEF-CLF
    'Take the blanket and cover the child (with it).'

b. አar ፍmbanjaf man uguuyoor.
    አar ፍ-mbanj-a-f man u-guuy-oor
    take SG-blanket(F)-DEF-CLF CSC sI:2SG-cover-ɔɔr
    'Take the blanket and cover yourself (with it).'

However, -ɔɔr is used only marginally as a reflexive marker, and the possibility of marking subject-object coreference by means of -ɔɔr (rather than -ɔɔrɔ or -ɔ) can only be analyzed as a lexically specified property of a handful of verbs that do not constitute a natural semantic class. In all cases, the ɔɔr-verb can also express a reciprocal meaning. We also came across an equipollent pair in which the ɔɔr-verb has a reflexive meaning, and three pairs in which the use of -ɔɔr can be analyzed as quasi-reflexive (a type of meaning more commonly encoded by means of the suffix -ɔ - see §4.3.3). The list of the ɔɔr-verbs attested with a reflexive or quasi-reflexive meaning in our data is given in Table 12.

In the case of sɔntɛn 'heal s.o.', the addition of -ɔɔr gives a reflexive-causative meaning (sɔntɛn-ɔɔr 'get treatment for self', cf. French se faire soigner), whereas the plain reflexive meaning 'heal self' is regularly expressed as sɔntɛn-ɔɔrɔ. Our data include no other verb with the possibility of a similar contrast between -ɔɔr and -ɔɔrɔ.
<table><caption>Table 12: Reflexive or quasi-reflexive -ɔɔr-verbs</caption><thead><tr><th>Reflexive or quasi-reflexive -ɔɔr-verb</th><th>Corresponding non-reflexive-verb</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>guuy-oor 'cover self'</td><td>guuy 'cover s.o. or s.th.'</td></tr><tr><td>kɔf-ɔɔr 'scratch self'</td><td>kɔf 'scratch s.o.'</td></tr><tr><td>kɔɔrɛn-ɔɔr 'heal self with inhalation'</td><td>kɔɔrɛn 'smoke an enclosed place'</td></tr><tr><td>naan-ɔɔr 'smear one's body'</td><td>naan-ɛn 'smear'</td></tr><tr><td>bɔɔñ-ɔɔr 'curl up'</td><td>bɔɔñ 'roll up, fold up'</td></tr><tr><td>raaw-ɔɔr 'stretch self (arms, legs, etc.)'</td><td>raaw 'stretch'</td></tr><tr><td>tiiw-oor 'turn self over, turn self around'</td><td>tiiw 'turn s.th. over, turn s.th. around'</td></tr></tbody></table>

### 4.4.2 Other uses of -ɔɔr

As illustrated in (41), -ɔɔr is fully productive as a reciprocal marker.

(41) a. Nan asaafolim, naanoli: “Miyus
n-an a-saaf-oli-m n-aan-oli mıyus
clN-REL sI:clA-greet-I:1PL.EXCL-ACT₁ PPF-sI:clA.say-I:1PL.EXCL 2PL.PRO
bɛy jijɛɛ bɛɛt?”
b-ɛy jı-ja-ɛ bɛɛt
clB-which sI:clJ-go-ACT₀ ALL
‘After greeting us, he asked us: “Where are you going?”’
b. Nan usaafoorum, naanɔm:
n-an u-saaf-ɔɔr-u-m n-aan-ɔm
clN-REL sI:1PL-greet-ɔɔr-EP-ACT₁ PPF-sI:clA.say-I:1SG
“KarɛɛsI bu?”
ka-rɛɛs-I bu
SG-name(K)-I:2SG how
‘After we greeted each other, he asked me: “What’s your name?”’

The form -ɔɔr is also productively used with intransitive verbs to express joint action (as in jaw-ɔɔr ‘go together’ < jaw ‘go’, or cın-ɔɔr ‘live together as neighbors’ < cın ‘live at a place’).

Finally, the suffix -ɔɔr distinguishes itself by the very high proportion of lexicalized verb pairs in which a verb which seems to have been derived via the addition of -ɔɔr expresses a meaning whose relationship to that of the base verb is more or less opaque in the present state of the language (see Table 13).
<table><caption>Table 13: Examples of verbs attesting lexicalized uses of -ɔɔr</caption><thead><tr><th>Lexicalized derivate</th><th>Base verb</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>baj-ɔɔr 'be in conflict'</td><td>baj 'have'</td></tr><tr><td>gam-ɔɔr 'lament'</td><td>gam 'advise'</td></tr><tr><td>gɔr-ɔɔr 'move (intr.)'</td><td>gɔr 'touch'</td></tr><tr><td>kaan-ɔɔr 'quarrel'</td><td>kaan 'do, make'</td></tr><tr><td>etc.</td><td></td></tr></tbody></table>

## 4.5 Summary

Table 14 summarizes the possible uses of the three verbal suffixes of Jóola Fóoñi variously involved in the coding of reflexivization:

<table><caption>Table 14: The possible uses of -ɔɔrɔ, -ɔ and -ɔɔr</caption><thead><tr><th></th><th>-ɔɔrɔ</th><th>-ɔ</th><th>-ɔɔr</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>reflexive (other than body care)</td><td>+</td><td>(+)</td><td>(+)</td></tr><tr><td>reflexive (body care)</td><td>-</td><td>+</td><td>-</td></tr><tr><td>quasi-reflexive</td><td>-</td><td>+</td><td>(+)</td></tr><tr><td>deausative</td><td>-</td><td>+</td><td>-</td></tr><tr><td>passive, resultative</td><td>-</td><td>(+)</td><td>-</td></tr><tr><td>reciprocal</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>+</td></tr><tr><td>joint action</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>+</td></tr><tr><td>self-intensification</td><td>+</td><td>-</td><td>-</td></tr></tbody></table>

## 5 Reflexivization and self-intensification

As already discussed above, Jóola Fóoñi has the cross-linguistically exceptional particularity of marking self-intensification of the subject by means of a verbal suffix also acting as a reflexive voice marker.

Jóola Fooñi also has free forms available to express self-intensification of NPs irrespective of their syntactic role, but our data include no example in which one of these self-intensifiers, either alone or combined with a pronoun, could be analyzed as acting as a reflexive pronoun.
## 5.1 The adnominal self-intensifier faŋ

Jóola Fooñi has a noun *f-aŋ* (gender F/K), glossed ‘personnalité, le moi/personal-ity, the self’ in Sapir et al.’s (1993) Jóola-French-English dictionary, which is the obvious source of the adnominal self-intensifier *faŋ* illustrated in (42). Note that *faŋ* as an adnominal self-intensifier is optionally suffixed by an index resuming the noun or pronoun it intensifies.<fnref n="16" />

<table><tr><td>(42)</td><td>a. Kuliinool</td><td>kɔɔkʊ</td><td>dɪ</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>ku-liin-ool</td><td>k-ɔɔ-kʊ</td><td>dɪ</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>PL-different.sex.sibling(BK)-I:clA</td><td>clBK-LCOP-clBK</td><td>PREP</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>bulokeb,</td><td>ampaɔɔl</td><td>ɔɔmʊ</td><td>dɪ</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>bu-lok-ɛ-b</td><td>ampa-ɔɔl</td><td>Ø-ɔɔ-mʊ</td><td>dɪ</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>SG-tears(B)-DEF-clB</td><td>father(A)-I:clA</td><td>clA-LCOP-clA</td><td>PREP</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>bulokeb,</td><td>ɔɔ</td><td>faŋɔɔl</td><td>Inaa</td><td>ɔɔmʊ</td><td>dɪ</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>bu-lok-ɛ-b</td><td>Ø-ɔɔ</td><td>faŋ-ɔɔl</td><td>lnaa</td><td>Ø-ɔɔ-mʊ</td><td>dɪ</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>SG-tears(B)-DEF-clB</td><td>clA-PRO</td><td>self-I:clA</td><td>Inaa</td><td>clA-LCOP-clA</td><td>PREP</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>bulokeb.</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td></td><td>bu-lok-ɛ-b</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td></td><td>SG-tears(B)-DEF-clB</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr></table>

‘Her brothers are in tears, her father is in tears, and Inaa herself is in tears.’

<table><tr><td>b.</td><td>Inje</td><td>faŋ, mɔɔ</td><td>nilɛkoumʊm</td><td>taatɛ.</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>inje</td><td>faŋ m-ɔɔ</td><td>n-i-lɛko-um-u-m</td><td>t-aa-t-ɛ</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>1SG.PRO</td><td>self</td><td>clM-PRO</td><td>PPF-sI:1SG-stay-APPL-EP-ACT₁</td><td>clT-DEM-clT-PROX</td></tr><tr><td></td><td></td><td>‘As for myself, this is why I stayed here.’</td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr></table>

<table><tr><td>c.</td><td>Ujɔɔnɛn</td><td>ʊwʊ</td><td>jak, jaksʊm</td><td>ʊgaalɛn</td><td>an,</td><td>jaksʊm</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>ʊ-jɔɔnɛn</td><td>ʊ-wʊ</td><td>jak</td><td>jaksʊm</td><td>ʊ-gaalɛn</td><td>an</td><td>jaksʊm</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>sI:2SG-fix</td><td>clU-DEM</td><td>well</td><td>PROH</td><td>sI:clU-disturb</td><td>person(A)</td><td>PROH</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>ʊgaalɛn</td><td>aw</td><td>faŋɪ.</td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td></td><td>ʊ-gaalɛn</td><td>aw</td><td>faŋ-ɪ</td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td></td><td>sI:clU-disturb</td><td>2SG.PRO</td><td>self-I:2SG</td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr></table>

‘Fix that properly, so that it doesn’t disturb anybody, and it doesn’t disturb yourself.’

Interestingly, in (42c), in spite of the fact that the subject index of class U is homonymous with the subject index of 2nd person singular, a reflexive interpre-

<footnote n="16">¹⁶The optional suffixation of indexes is also found with other adnominal particles such as cɛb ‘only’ or buroom ‘all’.</footnote>
tation of *jakswu* *ngaalɛn awfani* (that is, ‘don’t disturb yourself’) is excluded, since
if it were the case, the verb form should include the suffix -ɔɔrɔ.

5.2 The noun *fu-ko* ‘head’ in self-intensifier function

In Jóola Fóoñi, the noun *fu-ko* ‘head’ has a grammaticalized use as an adnomi-
nal self-intensifier. In this use, *fu-ko* obligatorily combines with an index resum-
ing the noun or pronoun it intensifies, and may optionally be introduced by the
comitative-instrumental-locative preposition *di*.

Among Atlantic languages, it is common that the noun ‘head’ combined with a possessive index or pronoun acts not only as a self-intensifier, as in (43a),<fnref n="17" /> but also as a reflexive pronoun, as in (43b).

(43) Wolof (Atlantic)

a. Waxal ko sa bopp!

wax-al ko sa bopp

say-IMP I:3SG POSS.2SG head(B)

‘Say it yourself.’

b. Wuude bi du ëwal

wuude b-i du ëw-al

shoemaker(B) clB-DEF.PROX NEG.SI:3SG sew.leather-APPL

boppam.

bopp-am

head(B)-I:3SG

‘The shoemaker does not sew leather for himself.’

The case of Jóola Fooñi is very different, since ‘*fu-ko* ‘head’ + possessive in-
dex or pronoun’ in its grammaticalized use can only occur as an emphatic self-
intensifier, never as a reflexive pronoun. In all the examples we have in our data,
‘*fu-ko* ‘head’ + possessive index or pronoun’ combines with a verb form marked
by the suffix -ɔɔrɔ in self-intensifying function, and just adds some additional
emphasis, as in (44b).

(44) a. Jaw usiilooor!

jaw u-siil-ooro

go sI:2SG-cook-ɔɔrɔ

‘Go and do the cooking for yourself!’ (autobenefaction)

or ‘Go and do the cooking yourself!’ (self-intensification)

<footnote n="17">¹⁷The two sentences quoted in (43) are from Diouf’s (2003) Wolof-French dictionary.</footnote>
b. Jaw usiiloooro fukoi!
jaw u-siil-ooro fu-ko-i
go sI:2sg-cook-ɔɔrɔ sg-head(F)-I:2sg
‘Go and do the cooking YOURSELF!’ (emphatic self-intensification)

c. * Jaw usiil fukoi!
jaw u-siil fu-ko-i
go sI:2sg-cook-ɔɔrɔ sg-head(F)-I:2sg

## 6 Conclusions

In this article, basing ourselves on a corpus of naturalistic texts of various genres completed by elicitation because of the relative scarcity of reflexive constructions in the corpus, we have analyzed the way Jóola Fóoñi codes coreference within the clause, as well as the non-reflexive uses of the verbal suffixes that have the ability of acting as reflexive voice markers. The main conclusions are as follows:

* Jóola Fóoñi does not have reflexive pronouns or indexes.

* Subject-object coreference requires verbal marking by means of deriva-
tional suffixes that reduce by one the number of objects compatible with
the verb and imply that a single participant, encoded as the subject, cumu-
lates the semantic roles assigned to the subject and (one of) the object(s)
in the construction of the base verb.

* Due to the extensive use of multiple-object constructions, and to the fact that beneficiaries as simply coded as objects, in Jóola Fóoñi, agent-goal coreference and agent-beneficiary coreference are just particular cases of subject-object coreference.

* Coreference relationships within the clause other than subject-object coreference are not treated differently from coreference in discourse.

* Three verbal suffixes may be found in constructions in which they act as re-
flexive voice markers, but all three also have non-reflexive uses: -ɔɔr, whose
use in reflexive constructions is marginal, is productively used as a reciprocal
voice marker; -ɔ, used as a reflexive voice marker with body-care verbs,
is also productive in quasi-reflexive (or auto-causative) and decausative
function; -ɔɔrɔ, analyzable as the default reflexive voice marker, is also fully
productive as a marker of self-intensification of the subject.
* Jóola Fóoñi shows that the co-expression of self-intensification and reflexivization, very common cross-linguistically for free self-forms, may also characterize verbal derivational suffixes.

## Acknowledgments

We would like to express our thanks to Boubacar Sambou for his help with the data analyzed in this chapter. We also wish to express our gratitude to the reviewer, proofreader and editors' team for their valuable input and comments.

## Abbreviations

This chapter follows the Leipzig Glossing Rules (Comrie et al. 2008). Additional abbreviations used are:

<table><tr><td>ACT</td><td>actualizer</td><td>OBLG</td><td>obligative</td></tr><tr><td>clX</td><td>class X</td><td>PPF</td><td>pre-prefix</td></tr><tr><td>CSC</td><td>consecutive</td><td>PREP</td><td>preposition</td></tr><tr><td>EP</td><td>epenthetic vowel</td><td>PRO</td><td>pronoun</td></tr><tr><td>HYP</td><td>hypothetical</td><td>RDPL</td><td>reduplicative suffix</td></tr><tr><td>I</td><td>index (other than subject<br>index cf. sI)</td><td>REL</td><td>relativizer</td></tr><tr><td>ICOMPL</td><td>incompletive</td><td>SEQ</td><td>sequential</td></tr><tr><td>LCOP</td><td>locational copula</td><td>sI</td><td>subject index</td></tr><tr><td></td><td></td><td>VEN</td><td>ventive</td></tr></table>

Capital letters between parentheses immediately after the lexical gloss of nouns (for example, ‘woman(A)’, or ‘dog(E)’) or after the gloss INF (‘infinitive’) indicate the agreement pattern associated to the form in question.

## References

Comrie, Bernard, Martin Haspelmath & Balthasar Bickel. 2008. *The Leipzig glossing rules: Conventions for interlinear morpheme-by-morpheme glosses*. Department of Linguistics of the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology & Department of Linguistics of Leipzig University. Leipzig.

Creissels, Denis. Forthcoming. *Transitivity, valency and voice*. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Diouf, Jean-Léopold. 2003. *Dictionnaire wolof-français et français-wolof* [Wolof-French and French-Wolof dictionary]. Paris: Karthala.
Gast, Volker & Peter Siemund. 2006. Rethinking the relationship between SELF-intensifiers and reflexives. *Linguistics* 44(2). 343–381.

Geniušienė, Emma Š. 1987. *The typology of reflexives*. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

Güldemann, Tom & Ines Fiedler. 2017. Niger-Congo “noun classes” conflate gender with declension. In Francesca Di Garbo & Bernhard Press. Wälchli (eds.), *Grammatical gender and linguistic complexity*, 85–135. Berlin: Language Science.

Haspelmath, Martin. 2023. Comparing reflexive constructions in the world's languages. In Katarzyna Janic, Nicoletta Puddu & Martin Haspelmath (eds.), * Reflexive constructions in the world's languages*, 19–62. Berlin: Language Science Press. DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.7874925.

Hopkins, Bradley L. 1995. *Contribution à une étude de la syntaxe diola-fogny*. [Contribution to a study of Diola-Fogny syntax]. Dakar: Société Internationale de Linguistique.

Janic, Katarzyna & Martin Haspelmath. 2023. Questionnaire on reflexive constructions in the world's languages. In Katarzyna Janic, Nicoletta Puddu & Martin Haspelmath (eds.), *Reflexive constructions in the world's languages*, 847–853. Berlin: Language Science Press. DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.7874992.

König, Ekkehard & Volker Gast. 2006. Focused assertion of identity: A typology of intensifiers. *Linguistic Typology* 10(2). 223–276.

Sapir, David J. 1965. *A grammar of Diola-Fogny*. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Sapir, David J., Bara Goudjabi, Amang Badji, Kalilou Badji & Chérif Afo Coly. 1993. *Dictionnaire jóola kujamutay*. [A dictionary of Jóola Kujamutay]. Charlottesville: University of Virginia.

Weiss, Henri. 1939. Grammaire et lexique diola du fogny (Casamance) [A grammar and lexicon of Diola-Fogny (Casamance)]. *Bulletin de l'IFAN* 1(2/3). 412–578.