(Description of a person's severe state of shock) '(...) his chest was ripped apart in shock and his head, the inside, broke neatly into two parts.' (Frog Story 2007, TH)

If compared to Amharic (Meyer this volume), where ideophones can be very productively derived from verbs, the derivation of ideophones is a marginal phenomenon in Kambaata and limited to some cases of conversion.

### 3.5. The semantics of ideophones

With regard to their semantics, ideophones range from the semantically broad (Table 13) to the semantically very specific and the evocation of complex scenes, e.g. *hokkóbb=y-* ‘(e.g. of a goat) stand on the hind legs and lean the front legs against (e.g. a tree)’.

<table><caption>**Table 13:** Illustrative list of semantically fairly broad ideophones.</caption><thead><tr><th>Intransitive</th><th>English</th><th>Transitive</th><th>English</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>biddíqq=y-</td><td>‘become flat, even, level;<br>spread (vi) out’</td><td>biddíqq=a'-</td><td>‘make flat, even, level; spread (vt)<br>out’</td></tr><tr><td>búrr=y-</td><td>‘fly’</td><td>búrr=a'</td><td>‘make fly’</td></tr><tr><td>cál~cál=y-</td><td>‘hang (vi) freely’</td><td>cál~cál=a'-</td><td>‘hang (vt) freely’</td></tr><tr><td>dákk=y-</td><td>‘be hidden, concealed’</td><td>dákk=a'-</td><td>‘hide, conceal’</td></tr><tr><td>fógg=y-</td><td>‘bend over/down’</td><td>fógg=a'-</td><td>‘make bend over/down’</td></tr><tr><td>hínc=y-</td><td>‘come close(r)’</td><td>hínc=a'-</td><td>‘bring close(r)’</td></tr><tr><td>lácc=y-</td><td>‘go slow, slow down (vi)’</td><td>lácc=a'-</td><td>‘do (s.th.) slowly, slow (s.th.)<br>down’</td></tr><tr><td>qúrc=y-</td><td>‘be swallowed’</td><td>qúrc=a'-</td><td>‘swallow’</td></tr><tr><td>sá'mm=y-</td><td>‘become quiet, fall silent’</td><td>sá'mm=a'-</td><td>‘silence (s.o.)’</td></tr><tr><td>shigíg=y-</td><td>‘become shocking,<br>disgusting, revolting’</td><td>shigíg=a'-</td><td>‘shock, disgust, revolt (s.o.)’</td></tr><tr><td>xább=y-</td><td>‘do (vi) well, in a straight<br>manner’</td><td>xább=a'-</td><td>‘do (s.th.) well, in a straight<br>manner, prepare (s.th.)’</td></tr><tr><td>xíshsh=y-</td><td>‘be tightened,<br>strengthened, deepened’</td><td>xíshsh=a'-</td><td>‘do (s.th.) tightly, strongly,<br>deeply’</td></tr></tbody></table>

Verbal concepts could be said to be expressed arbitrarily by verbal or by ideophonic lexemes in Kambaata; compare, e.g., *búrr=y-* ‘fly’ (IDEO) vs. *dagud-* ‘run’ (VERB); *cál~cál=y-* ‘hang (vi) freely’ (IDEO) vs. *olaal-* ‘hang (vi) freely; lean (e.g. of a tree
(Description of a person's severe state of shock) '(...) his chest was ripped apart in shock and his head, the inside, broke neatly into two parts.' (Frog Story 2007, TH)

If compared to Amharic (Meyer this volume), where ideophones can be very productively derived from verbs, the derivation of ideophones is a marginal phenomenon in Kambaata and limited to some cases of conversion.

### 3.5. The semantics of ideophones

With regard to their semantics, ideophones range from the semantically broad (Table 13) to the semantically very specific and the evocation of complex scenes, e.g. *hokkóbb=y-* ‘(e.g. of a goat) stand on the hind legs and lean the front legs against (e.g. a tree)’.

<table><caption>**Table 13:** Illustrative list of semantically fairly broad ideophones.</caption><thead><tr><th>Intransitive</th><th>English</th><th>Transitive</th><th>English</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>biddíqq=y-</td><td>‘become flat, even, level;<br>spread (vi) out’</td><td>biddíqq=a'-</td><td>‘make flat, even, level; spread (vt)<br>out’</td></tr><tr><td>búrr=y-</td><td>‘fly’</td><td>búrr=a'</td><td>‘make fly’</td></tr><tr><td>cál~cál=y-</td><td>‘hang (vi) freely’</td><td>cál~cál=a'-</td><td>‘hang (vt) freely’</td></tr><tr><td>dákk=y-</td><td>‘be hidden, concealed’</td><td>dákk=a'-</td><td>‘hide, conceal’</td></tr><tr><td>fógg=y-</td><td>‘bend over/down’</td><td>fógg=a'-</td><td>‘make bend over/down’</td></tr><tr><td>hínc=y-</td><td>‘come close(r)’</td><td>hínc=a'-</td><td>‘bring close(r)’</td></tr><tr><td>lácc=y-</td><td>‘go slow, slow down (vi)’</td><td>lácc=a'-</td><td>‘do (s.th.) slowly, slow (s.th.)<br>down’</td></tr><tr><td>qúrc=y-</td><td>‘be swallowed’</td><td>qúrc=a'-</td><td>‘swallow’</td></tr><tr><td>sá'mm=y-</td><td>‘become quiet, fall silent’</td><td>sá'mm=a'-</td><td>‘silence (s.o.)’</td></tr><tr><td>shigíg=y-</td><td>‘become shocking,<br>disgusting, revolting’</td><td>shigíg=a'-</td><td>‘shock, disgust, revolt (s.o.)’</td></tr><tr><td>xább=y-</td><td>‘do (vi) well, in a straight<br>manner’</td><td>xább=a'-</td><td>‘do (s.th.) well, in a straight<br>manner, prepare (s.th.)’</td></tr><tr><td>xíshsh=y-</td><td>‘be tightened,<br>strengthened, deepened’</td><td>xíshsh=a'-</td><td>‘do (s.th.) tightly, strongly,<br>deeply’</td></tr></tbody></table>

Verbal concepts could be said to be expressed arbitrarily by verbal or by ideophonic lexemes in Kambaata; compare, e.g., *búrr=y-* ‘fly’ (IDEO) vs. *dagud-* ‘run’ (VERB); *cál~cál=y-* ‘hang (vi) freely’ (IDEO) vs. *olaal-* ‘hang (vi) freely; lean (e.g. of a tree
about to fall)' (VERB); dákk = a'- 'hide, conceal (s.th.)' (IDEO) vs. maax- 'hide, conceal (s.th.)' (VERB); xóqq = y- 'rise, get up' (IDEO) vs. uurr- 'stand (up); stop' or ke'- 'rise, get up; start' (VERB). Also recall from §3.4.5 that color changes are expressed, seemingly arbitrarily, by ideophones, e.g. bûshsh = y- 'become red' (IDEO) – biishsh-á(ta) 'red' (ADJ), whereas other property changes are expressed by verbs, wiim- 'become full' – wiim-á(ta) 'full' (ADJ).

Like verbal lexemes, ideophones can be polysemous, e.g. díff = a'- '1. knock back (a drink), 2. cover up (s.th. that should not be revealed), 3. beat (s.o.) up violently, 4. douse, extinguish (a fire)'. Metaphorical extensions of ideophones are possible, e.g. míkk.míll = y- + NEG '(not) budge, (not) move a bit', which is concretely said of heavy, unmovable objects and exhausted persons, and figuratively of unfaltering persons and unshakable truths. The ideophone táff = a'- 'take/hold simply, take/hold quickly, just touch' has developed the function of negation reinforcement: '(not) even touch' > '(not) at all, (n)ever' (41).

(41) Táff=at-tí-i
bínn=át-toot-i
touch.IDEO=do-2SG.PFV.CVB-ADD
disperse.IDEO=do-2SG.NEG2-2SG.IMP
muccur-ú-kk
gizz-áha
clean-M.ACC-2SG.POSS
money-M.ACC
(Verse of a poem) 'Do not spend any good (lit. clean) money at all (on them)!'
(Kambaata Education Bureau 1989: 7.25)

Whereas attenuation and intensification are productively expressed by verb-derived ideophones in Amharic (Meyer this volume), these meanings are lexicalized in Kambaata ideophones. A significant number of them express the fact that an event is of short duration, sudden, or of low intensity, e.g. gáff = y- 'sit down for a little while' (attenuative of afuu'll- (VERB) 'sit down'), gíphph = y- 'stop briefly, pause' (attenuative of uurr- (VERB) 'stand, stop'), tákk = a'- 'drop simply, suddenly' (attenuative of uujj- (VERB) 'drop'), sháaqq = a'- 'sweep a small spot' (attenuative of abbaas- (VERB) 'sweep') or, the opposite, that an event is carried out thoroughly, completely, or excessively, e.g. hamúu = y- 'loose one's mind, go insane' (intensive of machchaar- (VERB) 'be(come) crazy'), táaqq = a'- 'tear beyond repair' (intensive of zar- (VERB) 'tear') and shúmm = a'- 'break into tiny pieces, crush' (intensive of biix- (VERB) 'break'). Attenuation and intensification are, however, only some of the meaning components that make ideophones semantically specific (narrow), as many of the examples in this paper attest;
about to fall)' (VERB); dákk = a'- 'hide, conceal (s.th.)' (IDEO) vs. maax- 'hide, conceal (s.th.)' (VERB); xóqq = y- 'rise, get up' (IDEO) vs. uurr- 'stand (up); stop' or ke'- 'rise, get up; start' (VERB). Also recall from §3.4.5 that color changes are expressed, seemingly arbitrarily, by ideophones, e.g. būshsh = y- 'become red' (IDEO) – bišshsh-á(ta) 'red' (ADJ), whereas other property changes are expressed by verbs, wiim- 'become full' – wiim-á(ta) 'full' (ADJ).

Like verbal lexemes, ideophones can be polysemous, e.g. díff = a'- '1. knock back (a drink), 2. cover up (s.th. that should not be revealed), 3. beat (s.o.) up violently, 4. douse, extinguish (a fire)'. Metaphorical extensions of ideophones are possible, e.g. míkk.míll = y- + NEG '(not) budge, (not) move a bit', which is concretely said of heavy, unmovable objects and exhausted persons, and figuratively of unfaltering persons and unshakable truths. The ideophone táff = a'- 'take/hold simply, take/hold quickly, just touch' has developed the function of negation reinforcement: '(not) even touch' > '(not) at all, (n)ever' (41).

(41) Táff=at-tí-i
bínn=át-toot-i
touch.IDEO=do-2SG.PFV.CVB-ADD
disperse.IDEO=do-2SG.NEG2-2SG.IMP
muccur-ú-kk
gizz-áha
clean-M.ACC-2SG.POSS
money-M.ACC
(Verse of a poem) 'Do not spend any good (lit. clean) money at all (on them)!'
(Kambaata Education Bureau 1989: 7.25)

Whereas attenuation and intensification are productively expressed by verb-derived ideophones in Amharic (Meyer this volume), these meanings are lexicalized in Kambaata ideophones. A significant number of them express the fact that an event is of short duration, sudden, or of low intensity, e.g. gáff = y- 'sit down for a little while' (attenuative of afuu'll- (VERB) 'sit down'), gíphph = y- 'stop briefly, pause' (attenuative of uurr- (VERB) 'stand, stop'), tákk = a'- 'drop simply, suddenly' (attenuative of uujj- (VERB) 'drop'), sháaqq = a'- 'sweep a small spot' (attenuative of abbaas- (VERB) 'sweep') or, the opposite, that an event is carried out thoroughly, completely, or excessively, e.g. hamúu = y- 'loose one's mind, go insane' (intensive of machchaar- (VERB) 'be(come) crazy'), táaqq = a'- 'tear beyond repair' (intensive of zar- (VERB) 'tear') and shúmm = a'- 'break into tiny pieces, crush' (intensive of biix- (VERB) 'break'). Attenuation and intensification are, however, only some of the meaning components that make ideophones semantically specific (narrow), as many of the examples in this paper attest;
others are, for instance, the manner/technique and the speed of an action, the accompanying sound and the nature of the participants.

Support for the impression that ideophones are semantically narrower than verbal lexemes comes from the observation that ideophones are often used as converbs in adverbial modification of a superordinate verb with which they are in a hyponym-hyperonym relationship. See (42) in which the semantically broader verb *usur* - ‘tie’ is preceded by the semantically narrower ideophonic converb *gánq* = *a*’- ‘tie, close tightly’. Also recall (164), in which *osal-siis* - ‘make laugh’ is preceded by the ideophonic converb *shínn* ~ *shínn* = *ass* - ‘make laugh heartily’, (28), in which *af* - ‘seize, hold, catch; begin’ is preceded by the ideophonic converb *xámm* = *a*’- ‘cause to stick’, and (32), in which *mar* - ‘go’ is preceded by *haráxx* ~ *haráxx* = *y* - ‘stride’.

(42) (...) odoorr-í omol-íin cí’mm = a’-eemmá
acacia-M.GEN bark-M.ICP shut_briefly.IDEO = do-3HON.PFV.REL
ill-íta fan-eenúmb-o qax-áan zoobb-eechch-í lokk-áta
eye-F.ACC open-3HON.NEG5.REL-M.OBL extent-M.LOC lions-SGV-M.GEN leg-F.ACC
gánq = a’-í usúrr-o
tie_tightly.IDEO = do-3M.PFV.CVB tie-3M.PFV
‘(...) before one had blinked one’s eyes, he (= the fox) had tightly tied up the
lion’s legs with a (strip of) acacia bark.’ (Kambaata Education Bureau 1989:
6.125)

The impression that ideophones are semantically narrower overall than verbs is,
however, difficult (if not impossible) to corroborate quantitatively and is possibly
skewed, as the following case study shows. If we return to the ideophone gánq = a'-
'tie, close tightly' in (42) and investigate the semantic field of tying,<fnref n="38" /> other
semantically narrow tying ideophones are easy to find: wíqq = a'- 'tie tightly' in (3),
sitít[t] = a'- 'tie tightly' (Alemu 2016: 960 2016),<fnref n="39" /> shóbb = a'- 'tie loosely' in (27),
shágg = a'- 'tie loosely (e.g. a cow to a pole)'; the ideophone xíshsh = a'- 'do tightly,
strongly, deeply' is also a frequent adverbial modifier to tying and closing verbs (but
not exclusively). These findings may, however, not be overestimated, because
semantically narrow tying verbs are at least as frequent. Of the 22 lexical entries in

<footnote n="38">³⁸ The same exercise could be repeated for any other semantic field of verbal concepts.</footnote>

<footnote n="39">³⁹ This lexeme could not yet be verified.</footnote>
others are, for instance, the manner/technique and the speed of an action, the accompanying sound and the nature of the participants.

Support for the impression that ideophones are semantically narrower than verbal lexemes comes from the observation that ideophones are often used as converbs in adverbial modification of a superordinate verb with which they are in a hyponym-hyperonym relationship. See (42) in which the semantically broader verb *usur* - ‘tie’ is preceded by the semantically narrower ideophonic converb *gánq* = *a*’- ‘tie, close tightly’. Also recall (164), in which *osal-siis* - ‘make laugh’ is preceded by the ideophonic converb *shínn* ~ *shínn* = *ass* - ‘make laugh heartily’, (28), in which *af-‘seize, hold, catch; begin’* is preceded by the ideophonic converb *xámm* = *a*’- ‘cause to stick’, and (32), in which *mar* - ‘go’ is preceded by *haráxx* ~ *haráxx* = *y* - ‘stride’.

(42) (...) odoorr-í omol-íin cí’mm = a’-eemmá
acacia-M.GEN bark-M.ICP shut_briefly.IDEO = do-3HON.PFV.REL
ill-íta fan-eenúmb-o qax-áan zoobb-eechch-í lokk-áta
eye-F.ACC open-3HON.NEG5.REL-M.OBL extent-M.LOC lions-SGV-M.GEN leg-F.ACC
gánq = a’-í usúrr-o
tie_tightly.IDEO = do-3M.PFV.CVB tie-3M.PFV
‘(...) before one had blinked one’s eyes, he (= the fox) had tightly tied up the
lion’s legs with a (strip of) acacia bark.’ (Kambaata Education Bureau 1989:
6.125)

The impression that ideophones are semantically narrower overall than verbs is,
however, difficult (if not impossible) to corroborate quantitatively and is possibly
skewed, as the following case study shows. If we return to the ideophone gánq = a'-
'tie, close tightly' in (42) and investigate the semantic field of tying,<fnref n="38" /> other
semantically narrow tying ideophones are easy to find: wíqq = a'- 'tie tightly' in (3),
sitít[t] = a'- 'tie tightly' (Alemu 2016: 960 2016),<fnref n="39" /> shóbb = a'- 'tie loosely' in (27),
shágg = a'- 'tie loosely (e.g. a cow to a pole)'; the ideophone xíshsh = a'- 'do tightly,
strongly, deeply' is also a frequent adverbial modifier to tying and closing verbs (but
not exclusively). These findings may, however, not be overestimated, because
semantically narrow tying verbs are at least as frequent. Of the 22 lexical entries in

<footnote n="38">³⁸ The same exercise could be repeated for any other semantic field of verbal concepts.</footnote>

<footnote n="39">³⁹ This lexeme could not yet be verified.</footnote>
Alemu (2016) that are paraphrased as being a type of *usur* - ‘tie’, selected examples
that I was able to verify are given in Table 14.

<table><caption>Table 14: Verbs from the semantic field of tying.</caption>
   <thead>
    <tr>
     <td>
      Verb
     </td>
     <td>
      English
     </td>
    </tr>
   </thead>
   <tbody>
    <tr>
     <td>
      gaajj-
     </td>
     <td>
      ‘tie up the back legs (of a cow for milking, so that it does not kick out)’
     </td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
     <td>
      kuttubb-
     </td>
     <td>
      ‘tie up two legs (esp. of equines and small livestock so that they do not wander far)’
     </td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
     <td>
      laangoob-
     </td>
     <td>
      ‘tie up to the right and left (of a cow in its pen so that it cannot turn around)’ (synonym: laambees-)
     </td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
     <td>
      saankaal-
     </td>
     <td>
      ‘(Alemu:) tie the neck to the front leg / (my field notes:) tie a front to a back leg (of an equine so that it does not wander far)’
     </td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
     <td>
      humbuub-
     </td>
     <td>
      ‘tie up, wrap (esp. butter in enset leaf sheaths)’
     </td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
     <td>
      qurunnees-
     </td>
     <td>
      ‘tie up in a bundle (so that it can be carried on the back, esp. enset food, cabbage, wood)’
     </td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
     <td>
      qirqaab-
     </td>
     <td>
      ‘tie up a load (esp. a load on a donkey)’
     </td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
     <td>
      wiriir-
     </td>
     <td>
      ‘tie a cloth around the opening of a pot’
     </td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
     <td>
      farshimm-
     </td>
     <td>
      ‘tie up in a sheaf’
     </td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
     <td>
      wixiix-
     </td>
     <td>
      ‘tie tightly together (e.g. two poles)’
     </td>
    </tr>
   </tbody>
  </table>

At present (and until further study), there is little reason to assume that Kambaata
ideophones are semantically any different from verbs.

**3.6. Ideophone frequency and size of the ideophone word class**

Ideophones are not restricted to a particular text type but found in narrative
texts, procedural texts, conversations, proverbs (43) and written texts (e.g.
schoolbooks).

(43) Gassim-á [kórj-o] luucc-ee-sé guumm-íchch-ut
morning-M.ACC jump-M.OBL fail.MID-3M.PFV-3F.OBJ.REL duikers-SGV-F.NOM
**tú'mm** = y-itán hos-sáa'u
try_in_vain.IDEO = say-3F.IPFV.CVB spend_the_day-3F.IPFV
(Proverb) ‘A duiker who failed when jumping in the morning tries the whole
day in vain.’ (Alamu & Alamaayyo 2017: 56 [correction by DWD])
Alemu (2016) that are paraphrased as being a type of *usur* - ‘tie’, selected examples
that I was able to verify are given in Table 14.

<table><caption>Table 14: Verbs from the semantic field of tying.</caption>
   <thead>
    <tr>
     <td>
      Verb
     </td>
     <td>
      English
     </td>
    </tr>
   </thead>
   <tbody>
    <tr>
     <td>
      gaajj-
     </td>
     <td>
      ‘tie up the back legs (of a cow for milking, so that it does not kick out)’
     </td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
     <td>
      kuttubb-
     </td>
     <td>
      ‘tie up two legs (esp. of equines and small livestock so that they do not wander far)’
     </td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
     <td>
      laangoob-
     </td>
     <td>
      ‘tie up to the right and left (of a cow in its pen so that it cannot turn around)’ (synonym: laambees-)
     </td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
     <td>
      saankaal-
     </td>
     <td>
      ‘(Alemu:) tie the neck to the front leg / (my field notes:) tie a front to a back leg (of an equine so that it does not wander far)’
     </td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
     <td>
      humbuub-
     </td>
     <td>
      ‘tie up, wrap (esp. butter in enset leaf sheaths)’
     </td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
     <td>
      qurunnees-
     </td>
     <td>
      ‘tie up in a bundle (so that it can be carried on the back, esp. enset food, cabbage, wood)’
     </td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
     <td>
      qirqaab-
     </td>
     <td>
      ‘tie up a load (esp. a load on a donkey)’
     </td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
     <td>
      wiriir-
     </td>
     <td>
      ‘tie a cloth around the opening of a pot’
     </td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
     <td>
      farshimm-
     </td>
     <td>
      ‘tie up in a sheaf’
     </td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
     <td>
      wixiix-
     </td>
     <td>
      ‘tie tightly together (e.g. two poles)’
     </td>
    </tr>
   </tbody>
  </table>

At present (and until further study), there is little reason to assume that Kambaata
ideophones are semantically any different from verbs.

**3.6. Ideophone frequency and size of the ideophone word class**

Ideophones are not restricted to a particular text type but found in narrative
texts, procedural texts, conversations, proverbs (43) and written texts (e.g.
schoolbooks).

(43) Gassim-á [kórj-o] luucc-ee-sé guumm-íchch-ut
morning-M.ACC jump-M.OBL fail.MID-3M.PFV-3F.OBJ.REL duikers-SGV-F.NOM
**tú'mm** = y-itán hos-sáa'u
try_in_vain.IDEO = say-3F.IPFV.CVB spend_the_day-3F.IPFV
(Proverb) ‘A duiker who failed when jumping in the morning tries the whole
day in vain.’ (Alamu & Alamaayyo 2017: 56 [correction by DWD])
One even finds ideophones in biblical texts (Table 15). The Gospel of John (Kambaata and Hadiyya Translation Project Hosaina 2005) contains 13 ideophone types and 73 tokens (in 11,851 words), i.e. 1 ideophone in ~162 words. If compared to the number of ideophones in a conversation (1,135 words, 1 ideophone in ~31 words) in Table 16, one can formulate the working hypothesis that natural conversational data has a higher ideophone ratio than translated data.

<table><caption>Table 15: Ideophone types attested in the Gospel of John (11,851 words).</caption><thead><tr><th>Ideophone type</th><th>English</th><th>Tokens</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>biddíq[q]=y-</td><td>'be spread out, be stretched out, be levelled'</td><td>1</td></tr><tr><td>biddíq[q]=a'-</td><td>'spread out, stretch out, level'</td><td>1</td></tr><tr><td>bínn=y-</td><td>'be dispersed, be scattered'</td><td>3</td></tr><tr><td>bínn=a'-</td><td>'disperse, scatter'</td><td>1</td></tr><tr><td>búll=ih-</td><td>'become greyish/ashen'</td><td>1</td></tr><tr><td>hátt=ih-</td><td>'become how, turn out where'</td><td>9</td></tr><tr><td>hátt=a'-</td><td>'do how, do what (to s.th.)'</td><td>3</td></tr><tr><td>hínc=y-</td><td>'come close(r)'</td><td>13</td></tr><tr><td>hínc=a'-</td><td>'bring close(r)'</td><td>2</td></tr><tr><td>hiríkk=y-</td><td>'be lowered, bend over, stoop'</td><td>9</td></tr><tr><td>hítt=a'</td><td>'do (s.th.) like this'</td><td>1</td></tr><tr><td>qúrc=a'-</td><td>'swallow (s.th.)'</td><td>2</td></tr><tr><td>tú=y-</td><td>'spit'</td><td>1</td></tr><tr><td>úff=a'-</td><td>'blow, breathe (into s.th.)'</td><td>1</td></tr><tr><td>wíll=y-</td><td>'sneak away, disappear (from s.o.'s view)'</td><td>1</td></tr><tr><td>xáphph=y-</td><td>'gather (vi)'</td><td>5</td></tr><tr><td>xáphph=a'-</td><td>'gather (vt)'</td><td>5</td></tr><tr><td>xóqq=y / xóqq~xóqq=y-</td><td>'rise'</td><td>5/2</td></tr><tr><td>xóqq=a'-</td><td>'raise'</td><td>7</td></tr><tr><td>13</td><td></td><td>73</td></tr></tbody></table>

<table><thead><tr><th>Ideophone type</th><th>English</th><th>Tokens</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>bárr=y- / búrr y-</td><td>'fly'</td><td>2</td></tr><tr><td>bolóng~bolóng=a'-</td><td>'move one's eyes (up/down, left/right)'</td><td>1</td></tr><tr><td>címm=y-</td><td>'slump down, shrink (vi)'</td><td>3</td></tr><tr><td>hátt=ih-</td><td>'become how, turn out where'</td><td>2</td></tr><tr><td>hátt=a'-</td><td>'do how, do what (to s.th.)'</td><td>1</td></tr></tbody></table>
One even finds ideophones in biblical texts (Table 15). The Gospel of John (Kambaata and Hadiyya Translation Project Hosaina 2005) contains 13 ideophone types and 73 tokens (in 11,851 words), i.e. 1 ideophone in ~162 words. If compared to the number of ideophones in a conversation (1,135 words, 1 ideophone in ~31 words) in Table 16, one can formulate the working hypothesis that natural conversational data has a higher ideophone ratio than translated data.

<table><caption>Table 15: Ideophone types attested in the Gospel of John (11,851 words).</caption><thead><tr><th>Ideophone type</th><th>English</th><th>Tokens</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>biddíq[q]=y-</td><td>'be spread out, be stretched out, be levelled'</td><td>1</td></tr><tr><td>biddíq[q]=a'-</td><td>'spread out, stretch out, level'</td><td>1</td></tr><tr><td>bínn=y-</td><td>'be dispersed, be scattered'</td><td>3</td></tr><tr><td>bínn=a'-</td><td>'disperse, scatter'</td><td>1</td></tr><tr><td>búll=ih-</td><td>'become greyish/ashen'</td><td>1</td></tr><tr><td>hátt=ih-</td><td>'become how, turn out where'</td><td>9</td></tr><tr><td>hátt=a'-</td><td>'do how, do what (to s.th.)'</td><td>3</td></tr><tr><td>hínc=y-</td><td>'come close(r)'</td><td>13</td></tr><tr><td>hínc=a'-</td><td>'bring close(r)'</td><td>2</td></tr><tr><td>hiríkk=y-</td><td>'be lowered, bend over, stoop'</td><td>9</td></tr><tr><td>hítt=a'</td><td>'do (s.th.) like this'</td><td>1</td></tr><tr><td>qúrc=a'-</td><td>'swallow (s.th.)'</td><td>2</td></tr><tr><td>tú=y-</td><td>'spit'</td><td>1</td></tr><tr><td>úff=a'-</td><td>'blow, breathe (into s.th.)'</td><td>1</td></tr><tr><td>wíll=y-</td><td>'sneak away, disappear (from s.o.'s view)'</td><td>1</td></tr><tr><td>xáphph=y-</td><td>'gather (vi)'</td><td>5</td></tr><tr><td>xáphph=a'-</td><td>'gather (vt)'</td><td>5</td></tr><tr><td>xóqq=y / xóqq~xóqq=y-</td><td>'rise'</td><td>5/2</td></tr><tr><td>xóqq=a'-</td><td>'raise'</td><td>7</td></tr><tr><td>13</td><td></td><td>73</td></tr></tbody></table>

<table><thead><tr><th>Ideophone type</th><th>English</th><th>Tokens</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>bárr=y- / búrr y-</td><td>'fly'</td><td>2</td></tr><tr><td>bolóng~bolóng=a'-</td><td>'move one's eyes (up/down, left/right)'</td><td>1</td></tr><tr><td>címm=y-</td><td>'slump down, shrink (vi)'</td><td>3</td></tr><tr><td>hátt=ih-</td><td>'become how, turn out where'</td><td>2</td></tr><tr><td>hátt=a'-</td><td>'do how, do what (to s.th.)'</td><td>1</td></tr></tbody></table>
<table><caption>**Table 16:** Ideophone types attested in a conversation about a picture book (TD2016-02-11_001; 12:10 min; 1,135 words; prompt: Carle 1984).</caption><thead><tr><td>Ideophone type</td><td>English</td><td>Tokens</td></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>hítt = ih-</td><td>'do (vi) like this'</td><td>5</td></tr><tr><td>kuchúchch = y-</td><td>'contract, shrink, coil up'</td><td>2</td></tr><tr><td>láaxx = a'- / láaxx-láaxx = a'-</td><td>'do (s.th.) quickly'</td><td>1/1</td></tr><tr><td>míkk.míll = y-</td><td>'budge, move a bit'</td><td>2</td></tr><tr><td>qúrc = a'-</td><td>'swallow (s.th.)'</td><td>4</td></tr><tr><td>sáww = y-</td><td>'think'</td><td>5</td></tr><tr><td>xább = y-</td><td>'do (vi) well, in a straight manner'</td><td>1</td></tr><tr><td>xámm = a'-</td><td>'make (s.th.) stick'</td><td>4</td></tr><tr><td>xíshsh = y-</td><td>'be tightened, strengthened, deepened'</td><td>1</td></tr><tr><td>xóphph = y-</td><td>'jump'</td><td>1</td></tr><tr><td>xóqq = y-</td><td>'rise'</td><td>1</td></tr><tr><td>15</td><td></td><td>37</td></tr></tbody></table>

A varied repertoire of ideophones is also a manifestation of a person's narrative skills. One of my consultants (TH) with a strong literary interest wrote up a Frog Story in Kambaata (based on Mayer 1969), a text with which he wanted to demonstrate his story-telling talent. The resulting text of 1,187 words (*Fe'llóncho, hakkánne yóont?* 'Frog, where are you?', unpublished) contains no less than 46 ideophone types and 64 tokens (i.e. 1 ideophone in ~19 words). The ideophone frequency in the (crafted) Frog Story is thus about twice as high as in the conversational data displayed in Table 16. A quantitative study of ideophones across text types/ genres and across individual speakers would make an interesting subject for future research.

In order to approach the question of how large the ideophone word class is, Alemu's comprehensive (2016) dictionary was taken as an empirical base. The author marks all ideophonic roots that obligatorily combine with either 'say' or 'do' by an asterisk (*) (2016: xxii).<fnref n="40" /> A search of all *-marked roots yielded 853 entries, of which most are paired ideophones.<fnref n="41" /> Quantifying the number of verb roots in the

<footnote n="40">⁴⁰ Interestingly, he does not invent a word class term for *-marked roots. In contrast, neologisms are created for all other Kambaata word classes (e.g. *shoosaaww-á* 'verb').</footnote>

<footnote n="41">⁴¹ Alemu's data contained originally 968 asterisks, but needed to be cleaned a bit (which I failed to do for Treis 2022). 51 lexemes which were said to combine with 'say' and 'do' but where the asterisk was forgotten were added to the count. 166 asterisks that occurred in accompanying texts outside the actual word list were subtracted. Note that this picture is still skewed, as the monolingual definitions</footnote>
<table><caption>**Table 16:** Ideophone types attested in a conversation about a picture book (TD2016-02-11_001; 12:10 min; 1,135 words; prompt: Carle 1984).</caption><thead><tr><td>Ideophone type</td><td>English</td><td>Tokens</td></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>hítt = ih-</td><td>'do (vi) like this'</td><td>5</td></tr><tr><td>kuchúchch = y-</td><td>'contract, shrink, coil up'</td><td>2</td></tr><tr><td>láaxx = a'- / láaxx-láaxx = a'-</td><td>'do (s.th.) quickly'</td><td>1/1</td></tr><tr><td>míkk.míll = y-</td><td>'budge, move a bit'</td><td>2</td></tr><tr><td>qúrc = a'-</td><td>'swallow (s.th.)'</td><td>4</td></tr><tr><td>sáww = y-</td><td>'think'</td><td>5</td></tr><tr><td>xább = y-</td><td>'do (vi) well, in a straight manner'</td><td>1</td></tr><tr><td>xámm = a'-</td><td>'make (s.th.) stick'</td><td>4</td></tr><tr><td>xíshsh = y-</td><td>'be tightened, strengthened, deepened'</td><td>1</td></tr><tr><td>xóphph = y-</td><td>'jump'</td><td>1</td></tr><tr><td>xóqq = y-</td><td>'rise'</td><td>1</td></tr><tr><td>15</td><td></td><td>37</td></tr></tbody></table>

A varied repertoire of ideophones is also a manifestation of a person's narrative skills. One of my consultants (TH) with a strong literary interest wrote up a Frog Story in Kambaata (based on Mayer 1969), a text with which he wanted to demonstrate his story-telling talent. The resulting text of 1,187 words (*Fe'llóncho, hakkánne yóont?* 'Frog, where are you?', unpublished) contains no less than 46 ideophone types and 64 tokens (i.e. 1 ideophone in ~19 words). The ideophone frequency in the (crafted) Frog Story is thus about twice as high as in the conversational data displayed in Table 16. A quantitative study of ideophones across text types/ genres and across individual speakers would make an interesting subject for future research.

In order to approach the question of how large the ideophone word class is, Alemu's comprehensive (2016) dictionary was taken as an empirical base. The author marks all ideophonic roots that obligatorily combine with either 'say' or 'do' by an asterisk (*) (2016: xxii).<fnref n="40" /> A search of all *-marked roots yielded 853 entries, of which most are paired ideophones.<fnref n="41" /> Quantifying the number of verb roots in the

<footnote n="40">⁴⁰ Interestingly, he does not invent a word class term for *-marked roots. In contrast, neologisms are created for all other Kambaata word classes (e.g. *shoosaaww-á* 'verb').</footnote>

<footnote n="41">⁴¹ Alemu's data contained originally 968 asterisks, but needed to be cleaned a bit (which I failed to do for Treis 2022). 51 lexemes which were said to combine with 'say' and 'do' but where the asterisk was forgotten were added to the count. 166 asterisks that occurred in accompanying texts outside the actual word list were subtracted. Note that this picture is still skewed, as the monolingual definitions</footnote>
dictionary would require considerable effort, because not only roots but also all derived stems, any combination with a support verb and even verbs in cross-references are marked as “(sh)” for shoosawwá ‘verb’. To be able to provide a rough estimate of the number of verbal roots in the dictionary, I counted them on 20 randomly chosen pages (pp. 368-389). The result was an average of 2.05 verb roots per page, which led to an estimate of 2388 verb roots for the whole dictionary (1,165 pages). This means that, among all lexemes expressing verbal concepts, ideophones amount to an estimated 26% (853/3241) and verbs to about 74% (2388/3241).

Borrowing into the ideophone word class is possible and observed in my field work data.<fnref n="42" /> As Amharic ideophones (see Meyer this volume) are also invariant and morphosyntactically integrated with ‘say’ and ‘do’, Kambaata speakers can simply borrow the ideophonic root and inflect them with the corresponding Kambaata support verb, as (44) attests. In (44), speaker ED first uses the Amharic loan ‘sit down’ < አስብ እለ እግዚእን እግዚእን እግዚእን alä (Kane 1990: vol. 1: 843) with the Kambaata support verb, then translates the ideophone into Kambaata.

(44) (...) tées-u **qúcc** = y-éen
now-M.OBL sit_down.IDEO[AMH] = say-3HON.PFV.CVB
afuu'll-éen kánk-u has-is-áno
sit_down 3HON.PFV.CVB this_much-M.NOM want-CAUS1-3M.IPFV
‘(...) one sits down, sits down (and says:) “This much is needed.”’ (EK2016-02-23_003)

## 4. Other ‘say’-constructions

This section gives an introduction into the expression of reported speech in general and of reported interjections in particular. It points out the fuzzy boundary between reported interjections and ideophone-support constructions. In the second part,

<footnote>contain a number of ideophones which do not yet occur as entries (and are hence not *-marked). No dictionary can ever be complete, and a number of ideophones attested in my fieldwork data are absent from Alemu (2016), e.g. *bolóng-bolóng* = a’- ‘move one’s eyes (up/down, left/right)’ and *kuchúchch* = y- ‘contract, shrink, coil up’, to name but two examples from Table 16.</footnote>

<footnote n="42">⁴² See also the discussion on ideophone borrowing in Crass (2005: 234) on K'abeena.</footnote>
dictionary would require considerable effort, because not only roots but also all derived stems, any combination with a support verb and even verbs in cross-references are marked as “(sh)” for shoosawwá ‘verb’. To be able to provide a rough estimate of the number of verbal roots in the dictionary, I counted them on 20 randomly chosen pages (pp. 368-389). The result was an average of 2.05 verb roots per page, which led to an estimate of 2388 verb roots for the whole dictionary (1,165 pages). This means that, among all lexemes expressing verbal concepts, ideophones amount to an estimated 26% (853/3241) and verbs to about 74% (2388/3241).

Borrowing into the ideophone word class is possible and observed in my field work data.<fnref n="42" /> As Amharic ideophones (see Meyer this volume) are also invariant and morphosyntactically integrated with ‘say’ and ‘do’, Kambaata speakers can simply borrow the ideophonic root and inflect them with the corresponding Kambaata support verb, as (44) attests. In (44), speaker ED first uses the Amharic loan ‘sit down’ < አስብ እንስ እግዚእን እግዚእን እግዚእን alä (Kane 1990: vol. 1: 843) with the Kambaata support verb, then translates the ideophone into Kambaata.

(44) (...) tées-u **qúcc** = y-éen
now-M.OBL sit_down.IDEO[AMH] = say-3HON.PFV.CVB
afuu'll-éen kánk-u has-is-áno
sit_down 3HON.PFV.CVB this_much-M.NOM want-CAUS1-3M.IPFV
‘(...) one sits down, sits down (and says:) “This much is needed.”’ (EK2016-02-23_003)

## 4. Other ‘say’-constructions

This section gives an introduction into the expression of reported speech in general and of reported interjections in particular. It points out the fuzzy boundary between reported interjections and ideophone-support constructions. In the second part,

<footnote>contain a number of ideophones which do not yet occur as entries (and are hence not *-marked). No dictionary can ever be complete, and a number of ideophones attested in my fieldwork data are absent from Alemu (2016), e.g. *bolóng-bolóng* = a’- ‘move one’s eyes (up/down, left/right)’ and *kuchúchch* = y- ‘contract, shrink, coil up’, to name but two examples from Table 16.</footnote>

<footnote n="42">⁴² See also the discussion on ideophone borrowing in Crass (2005: 234) on K'abeena.</footnote>
constructions with ‘say’ for the expression of transitory or vestigial tastes and smells
are portrayed. Here the coverbs of ‘say’ are not ideophonic but nominal.<fnref n="43" />

**4.1. Reported speech**

The verb y- ‘say’ is used in the matrix clause of reported speech constructions. It either follows the reported speech as the only utterance verb, see (45), or functions as a converb to a semantically narrower, superordinate utterance verb, e.g. *kul-‘tell’, fanqashsh-‘reply’, xa‘mm-‘ask’* (46).

(45) (...) *mát-o* yaa'-áan mánn-u afuu'll-ée
one-M.OBL meeting-M.LOC people-M.NOM sit_down-3M.PFV.REL
j-áata [hannó á'nnu baad-ú maassa'-éen
time-F.ACC please.INTJ 2HON.NOM land-M.ACC bless-2PL.PFV.CVB
jammarr-é]REPORTED SPEECH y'-éeni-yan nubáach-ch-u
start-2PL.IMP say-3HON.PFV.CVB-DS elders-SGV-M.NOM
baad-ú maassa'-íi jammar-áno
land-M.ACC bless-M.DAT start-3M.IPFV

‘(...) when people are sitting (together) in a meeting, one says, “Please, start to bless the land!”, and an elder starts to bless the land.’ (AN2016-02-19_001)

(46) (...) *híkka* man-ch-ú [mát-it gambáll-at
A_DEM2.M.ACC person-SGV-M.ACC one-F.NOM black-F.NOM
hóol-ch-ut kanníin hig-góo'? xuud-déentaa'
sheep-SGV-F.NOM P_DEM1.M.ICP pass-3F.PFV see-2PL.PRF
íkke?]REPORTED SPEECH y-í xa'mm-áno
PAST say-3M.PFV.CVB ask-3M.IPFV

‘(...) he (who looks for his animal) asks that man (who passes him): “Has a black ewe passed by here? Have you seen (it)?”’ (AN2016-02-19_002)

The underived verb y- ‘say’ has three arguments, (i) the speaker, expressed minimally by a subject index, (ii) the addressee, optionally encoded by a

<footnote n="43">⁴³ Due to reasons of space, other constructions in which (a more or less bleached) ‘say’ is used are left out of the discussion, e.g. the purpose, benefactive focus, internal impulse and ‘at least’-constructions.</footnote>
constructions with ‘say’ for the expression of transitory or vestigial tastes and smells are portrayed. Here the coverbs of ‘say’ are not ideophonic but nominal.<fnref n="43" />

## 4.1. Reported speech

The verb y- ‘say’ is used in the matrix clause of reported speech constructions. It either follows the reported speech as the only utterance verb, see (45), or functions as a converb to a semantically narrower, superordinate utterance verb, e.g. kul- ‘tell’, fanqashsh- ‘reply’, xa’mm- ‘ask’ (46).

(45) (...) *mát-o* yaa'-áan mánn-u afuu'll-ée
one-M.OBL meeting-M.LOC people-M.NOM sit_down-3M.PFV.REL

j-áata [hannó á'nnu baad-ú maassa'-éen

time-F.ACC please.INTJ 2HON.NOM land-M.ACC bless-2PL.PFV.CVB

jammarr-é]REPORTED SPEECH y'-éeni-yan nubáach-ch-u

start-2PL.IMP say-3HON.PFV.CVB-DS elders-SGV-M.NOM

baad-ú maassa'-íi jammar-áno

land-M.ACC bless-M.DAT start-3M.IPFV

‘(...) when people are sitting (together) in a meeting, one says, “Please, start to bless the land!”, and an elder starts to bless the land.’ (AN2016-02-19_001)

(46) (...) *híkka* man-ch-ú [mát-it gambáll-at
A_DEM2.M.ACC person-SGV-M.ACC one-F.NOM black-F.NOM

hóol-ch-ut kanníin hig-góo'? xuud-déentaa'

sheep-SGV-F.NOM P_DEM1.M.ICP pass-3F.PFV see-2PL.PRF

íkke?]REPORTED SPEECH y-í xa'mm-áno

PAST say-3M.PFV.CVB ask-3M.IPFV

‘(...) he (who looks for his animal) asks that man (who passes him): “Has a black ewe passed by here? Have you seen (it)?”’ (AN2016-02-19_002)

The underived verb y- ‘say’ has three arguments, (i) the speaker, expressed minimally by a subject index, (ii) the addressee, optionally encoded by a

<footnote n="43">⁴³ Due to reasons of space, other constructions in which (a more or less bleached) ‘say’ is used are left out of the discussion, e.g. the purpose, benefactive focus, internal impulse and ‘at least’-constructions.</footnote>
pronominal object suffix on ‘say’ and/or by an independent direct object noun
phrase (see the accusative-marked *híkka manchú* ‘that man’ in (46)), and (iii) the
speech report. If the reported speech is pronominalized (e.g. ‘She didn’t say that’),
the pronoun is also accusative-marked, which makes y- ‘say’ a ditransitive verb.

The boundary between reported speech and ideophone-support constructions is
fuzzy in two areas. Firstly, the small subclass of onomatopoeic ideophones (Treis &
Deginet 2024), which contains, among others, animal cries like *humbáa = y-‘moo (of
cattle)’ in (47) and bodily sounds like buhhú = y-‘cough, produce a coughing sound’,
might still be interpretable as a reported animal cry and a reported bodily sound.

(47) Kú sá'-u humbáa = y-ú batíshsh-ee'u
A_DEM1.M.NOM cow-M.NOM moo.IDEO = say-M.ACC do_much-3M.PRF

‘This cow has mood a lot/too much.’ (Field notes 2022, DWD)

Secondly, the fine line between quoted interjections and ideophones is difficult to draw. Members of both word classes are morphologically invariant, but interjections, unlike ideophones, constitute utterances of their own. Thus one could simply consider all invariant coverbs in ‘say’-constructions, e.g. *shiinchaallé* ‘never again!’ in (48), to be interjections if they are also attested as independent utterances, which is the case for *shiinchaallé* ‘never again!’ in (49).

(48) **Shiinchaallé** y-í gíbb-ee'u
neverAgain INTJ say-3M.PFV.CVB refuse-3M.PRF

‘He said “Never again!” and refused (to do it).’ (Field notes 2023, DWD)

(49) **Shiinchaallé**, lan-kíi hikka = b-á mar-áam-ba'a
neverAgain INTJ two-ORD.DAT A_DEM2.M.ACC = PLC-M.ACC go-1SG.IPFV-NEG1

‘Never again, I won’t go there a second time!’ (Field notes 2023, DWD)

However, this approach is not entirely satisfactory in cases where the meaning of a
construction consisting of an interjection plus ‘say’ is not the sum of its parts, or,
said differently, where the combination has become conventionalized, has extended
its meaning and is in most contexts no longer interpretable as a direct speech report.
An example which illustrates this point is the interjection/ideophone *hánda*
‘(I/we/someone/it are/is well,) thanks to God’. The only possible addressee of the
pronominal object suffix on ‘say’ and/or by an independent direct object noun
phrase (see the accusative-marked *híkka manchú* ‘that man’ in (46)), and (iii) the
speech report. If the reported speech is pronominalized (e.g. ‘She didn’t say that’),
the pronoun is also accusative-marked, which makes y- ‘say’ a ditransitive verb.

The boundary between reported speech and ideophone-support constructions is
fuzzy in two areas. Firstly, the small subclass of onomatopoeic ideophones (Treis &
Deginet 2024), which contains, among others, animal cries like *humbáa=y-* ‘moo (of
cattle)’ in (47) and bodily sounds like *buhhú=y-* ‘cough, produce a coughing sound’,
might still be interpretable as a reported animal cry and a reported bodily sound.

(47) Kú sá'-u humbáa=y-ú batíshsh-ee'u
A_DEM1.M.NOM cow-M.NOM moo.IDEO=say-M.ACC do_much-3M.PRF

‘This cow has mood a lot/too much.’ (Field notes 2022, DWD)

Secondly, the fine line between quoted interjections and ideophones is difficult to draw. Members of both word classes are morphologically invariant, but interjections, unlike ideophones, constitute utterances of their own. Thus one could simply consider all invariant coverbs in ‘say’-constructions, e.g. *shiinchaallé* ‘never again!’ in (48), to be interjections if they are also attested as independent utterances, which is the case for *shiinchaallé* ‘never again!’ in (49).

(48) **Shiinchaallé** y-í gíbb-ee'u
neverAgain.INTJ say-3M.PFV.CVB refuse-3M.PRF

‘He said “Never again!” and refused (to do it).’ (Field notes 2023, DWD)

(49) **Shiinchaallé**, lan-kíi hikka = b-á mar-áam-ba'a
neverAgain.INTJ two-ORD.DAT A_DEM2.M.ACC = PLC-M.ACC go-1SG.IPFV-NEG1

‘Never again, I won’t go there a second time!’ (Field notes 2023, DWD)

However, this approach is not entirely satisfactory in cases where the meaning of a
construction consisting of an interjection plus ‘say’ is not the sum of its parts, or,
said differently, where the combination has become conventionalized, has extended
its meaning and is in most contexts no longer interpretable as a direct speech report.
An example which illustrates this point is the interjection/ideophone *hánda*
‘(I/we/someone/it are/is well,) thanks to God’. The only possible addressee of the
speaker's thanks is God; people are not thanked with *hánda*. In exchanges about one's well-being (in the broadest sense, i.e. physical, psychological, economical), *hánda* constitutes an utterance of its own and is thus best interpreted as an interjection (50).

(50) [A:] *Wées-it* iill-ítee-ndo?
enset-F.NOM reach-3F.PRF-Q

[B:] **Hánda** (isíi)<fnref n="44" /> iill-ítee'u
thanks_to_God.INTJ3 M.DAT reach-3F.PRF

[A:] ‘Are the enset (plants) ready (to be harvested)?’ – [B:] ‘Thanks to God, they are ready.’ (Field notes 2023, DWD)

The combination of *hánda* and *y-* ‘say’ is in principle interpretable as ‘say “Thanks to God”’, but in the vast majority of cases it is best translated as ‘be thankful, be grateful; be content; be gratifying’. Speakers do not interpret the examples in (51)-(52) as direct quotes of the subject, which is especially evident when the subject is an animal, as in (52). One might thus prefer not analyze *hánda* as an interjection in these contexts but as an ideophone that takes ‘say’ as a support verb.

(51) **Hánda** = y-í
be_grateful.IDEO = say-3M.PFV.CVB
pass_the_night-3M.PRF.REL-M.COP2
(Speaking about someone's attitude/character) 'He is (someone) who is content (with his life, with what he has)/he is a positive person (lit. he is (someone) who passes the night gratefully).' (Field notes 2023, DWD)

**gáll-ee-haa**

(52) Habank-á ichchí-i **hánda** = y-áano-ba'a
how_much-M.ACC eat.3M.PFV.CVB-ADD be_grateful.IDEO = say-3M.IPFV-NEG1
(Speaking about a cow with a bad feed conversion ratio) 'No matter how much it eats, it is not gratifying.' (Field notes 2022, DWD)

**hánda** = y-áano-ba'a

A similar point can be made for the pain and grief interjection *áayye* ‘ouch!, I am so sad/sorry (about the loss)!’. In combination with ‘say’, *áayye* = *y*-, it translates as ‘call out in pain; call out in sadness (at a funeral, in the home of a deceased)’. Likewise, the interjection *ekkú* ‘okay’ commonly combines with ‘say’ to express *ekkú* = *y*- ‘agree, obey’, irrespective of whether the agreement has actually been

<footnote n="44">⁴⁴ *Hánda* can govern a dative constituent; the optional *isíi* ‘for him’ refers to God.</footnote>
speaker's thanks is God; people are not thanked with *hánda*. In exchanges about one's well-being (in the broadest sense, i.e. physical, psychological, economical), *hánda* constitutes an utterance of its own and is thus best interpreted as an interjection (50).

(50) [A:] *Wées-it* iill-ítee-ndo?
enset-F.NOM reach-3F.PRF-Q

[B:] **Hánda** (isíi) <fnref n="44" /> iill-ítee'u
thanks_to_God.INTJ3 M.DAT reach-3F.PRF

[A:] ‘Are the enset (plants) ready (to be harvested)?’ – [B:] ‘Thanks to God, they are ready.’ (Field notes 2023, DWD)

The combination of *hánda* and *y-* ‘say’ is in principle interpretable as ‘say “Thanks to God”’, but in the vast majority of cases it is best translated as ‘be thankful, be grateful; be content; be gratifying’. Speakers do not interpret the examples in (51)-(52) as direct quotes of the subject, which is especially evident when the subject is an animal, as in (52). One might thus prefer not analyze *hánda* as an interjection in these contexts but as an ideophone that takes ‘say’ as a support verb.

(51) **Hánda** = y-í
be_grateful.IDEO = say-3M.PFV.CVB
pass_the_night-3M.PRF.REL-M.COP2
(Speaking about someone's attitude/character) 'He is (someone) who is content (with his life, with what he has)/he is a positive person (lit. he is (someone) who passes the night gratefully).' (Field notes 2023, DWD)

**gáll-ee-haa**

(52) Habank-á ichchí-i **hánda** = y-áano-ba'a
how_much-M.ACC eat.3M.PFV.CVB-ADD be_grateful.IDEO = say-3M.IPFV-NEG1
(Speaking about a cow with a bad feed conversion ratio) 'No matter how much it eats, it is not gratifying.' (Field notes 2022, DWD)

**hánda**

A similar point can be made for the pain and grief interjection *áayye* ‘ouch!, I am so sad/sorry (about the loss)!’. In combination with ‘say’, *áayye* = *y*-, it translates as ‘call out in pain; call out in sadness (at a funeral, in the home of a deceased)’. Likewise, the interjection *ekkú* ‘okay’ commonly combines with ‘say’ to express *ekkú* = *y*- ‘agree, obey’, irrespective of whether the agreement has actually been

<footnote n="44">⁴⁴ *Hánda* can govern a dative constituent; the optional *isíi* ‘for him’ refers to God.</footnote>
expressed by ekkú ‘okay’ or otherwise.<fnref n="45" /> So an interpretation of ekkú = y- ‘agree, obey’ as reported interjection does not seem warranted.<fnref n="46" />

## 4.2. Taste and smells

A construction consisting of a reduplicated oblique noun and ‘say’ is used for the expression of transitory and vestigial tastes and smells (53). The oblique is a multifunctional nominal case which marks locations, instruments and vocatives. Regarding its form, the construction is indicative of the reduplicated ideophones (§3.4.3); semantically, it is evocative of the attenuative value often expressed by ideophones (§3.5). For a similar construction in Amharic, see Meyer (this volume).

(53) **Hítt** = íkk
**like that.** IDEO = become.3M.PFV.CVB 3F.ABL orange-M.ACC-DEF
**hi'rr-í** = ké'i
**arrab-éen** **qáshsh**
**buy.** MID-1SG.PFV.CVB = SEQ **tongue**-F.ICP **pierce**.1SG.PFV.CVB
**xuud-aammí** = da
**áda**
**see**-1SG.IPFV.REL = COND **PART**

**wó'-a** ~ **wó'-a** = y-áyyoo-haa

water-M.OBL ~ water-M.OBL = say-3M.PROG.REL- M.COP2

‘But (lit. it being like that) when I tasted (lit. pierced with the tongue (to) see) the oranges after I had bought them from her, ah!, they tasted watery (lit. they were saying water-water).’ (Field notes 2014, DWD)

The reduplicated noun can be modified to characterize the smell or taste further (54).

(54) **Wok-í**
**wó'-a** ~ **wó'-a** = y-áyyoo-haa
**beans**-M.GEN **water**-M.OBL ~ **water**-M.OBL = say-3M.PROG.REL-M.COP2

‘(Speaking of drinking water:) ‘It smells/tastes like bean water (lit. (it) says bean’s water ~ water).’ (Possible context: Beans were cooked in the pot in which the drinking water has been heated.) (Field notes 2021, AYZ)

<footnote n="45">⁴⁵ Interestingly, most Kambaata speakers use the borrowed interjection *íshshi* (< Amharic) to say ‘okay’, while *ekkú* = y- is the most natural translation of ‘agree, obey’.</footnote>

<footnote n="46">⁴⁶ A similar case from the Ethiosemitic language Tigre (tig) is discussed in Cohen et al. (2002: 246).</footnote>
expressed by ekkú ‘okay’ or otherwise.<fnref n="45" /> So an interpretation of ekkú = y- ‘agree, obey’ as reported interjection does not seem warranted.<fnref n="46" />

## 4.2. Taste and smells

A construction consisting of a reduplicated oblique noun and ‘say’ is used for the expression of transitory and vestigial tastes and smells (53). The oblique is a multifunctional nominal case which marks locations, instruments and vocatives. Regarding its form, the construction is indicative of the reduplicated ideophones (§3.4.3); semantically, it is evocative of the attenuative value often expressed by ideophones (§3.5). For a similar construction in Amharic, see Meyer (this volume).

(53) **Hítt**= íkk
**like that.** IDEO = become.3M.PFV.CVB 3F.ABL orange-M.ACC-DEF
**hi'rr-í**= **ké'i**
**arrab-éen** **qáshsh**
**buy.**MID-1SG.PFV.CVB = SEQ **tongue**-F.icp **pierce**.1SG.PFV.CVB
**xuud-aammí**= **da**
**áda**
**see**-1SG.IPFV.REL = COND **PART**

**wó'-a**~**wó'-a** = y-áyyoo-haa

water-M.OBL~water-M.OBL = say-3M.PROG.REL- M.COP2

‘But (lit. it being like that) when I tasted (lit. pierced with the tongue (to) see) the oranges after I had bought them from her, ah!, they tasted watery (lit. they were saying water-water).’ (Field notes 2014, DWD)

The reduplicated noun can be modified to characterize the smell or taste further (54).

(54) **Wok-í**
**wó'-a**~**wó'-a** = y-áyyoo-haa
**beans**-M.GEN **water**-M.OBL~**water**-M.OBL = say-3M.PROG.REL-M.COP2

‘(Speaking of drinking water:) ‘It smells/tastes like bean water (lit. (it) says bean’s water~water).’ (Possible context: Beans were cooked in the pot in which the drinking water has been heated.) (Field notes 2021, AYZ)

<footnote n="45">⁴⁵ Interestingly, most Kambaata speakers use the borrowed interjection *íshshi* (< Amharic) to say ‘okay’, while *ekkú* = y- is the most natural translation of ‘agree, obey’.</footnote>

<footnote n="46">⁴⁶ A similar case from the Ethiosemitic language Tigre (tig) is discussed in Cohen et al. (2002: 246).</footnote>
Table 17 gives an overview of all taste and smell constructions attested in my fieldwork data with different speakers; some of the examples were overheard, others elicited.<fnref n="47" /> All of them combine with y- ‘say’; combinations with a'- ‘do’ are unattested and were ruled out by a consulted native speaker.

<table><caption>**Table 17:** Transitory and vestigial tastes and smells.</caption><thead><tr><th>Ideophone</th><th>English</th><th>Origin</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>babbáro~babbáro=y-</td><td>'have a taste of pepper'</td><td>babbar-úta (F) 'hot<br>Ethiopian spice mixture'</td></tr><tr><td>gotí ále~ále=y-</td><td>'smell of hyena's body (e.g. a<br>person who does not wash)'</td><td>got-á (M) 'hyena', al-í (M)<br>'body'</td></tr><tr><td>háqqa~háqqa=y-</td><td>'have a bland taste, be boring (of a<br>talk)'</td><td>haqq-á (M) 'wood'</td></tr><tr><td>haráqe~haráqe=y-</td><td>'smell of brandy (e.g. a person who<br>is drunk)'</td><td>haraq-íta (F) 'brandy'</td></tr><tr><td>hixíchcho~hixíchcho=y-</td><td>'have a taste of lemongrass (e.g.<br>cheese)'</td><td>hixichch-ú (M) 'lemongrass'</td></tr><tr><td>hóolla~hóolla=y-</td><td>'smell of sheep (e.g. a person who<br>has been in the sheep pen)'</td><td>hooll-áta (F) 'sheep'</td></tr><tr><td>íchcha~íchcha=y-</td><td>'smell of food (e.g. a room)'</td><td>ichch-áta (F) 'food'</td></tr><tr><td>má'lle~má'lle=y- /<br>má'lla~má'lla=y-</td><td>'have a bland taste, lack spices'</td><td>ma'll-á (M) / ma'll-íta (F)<br>'bland food'</td></tr><tr><td>maxíne~maxíne=y-</td><td>'have a taste of salt'</td><td>maxin-íta (F) 'salt'</td></tr><tr><td>shá'lla~shá'lla=y-</td><td>'smell of cow dung (e.g. a person<br>who has mucked out the cowshed)'</td><td>sha'll-á (M) 'cow dung'</td></tr><tr><td>wilúile~wilúile=y-</td><td>'smell of smoke (e.g. clothes of a<br>person who has sat beside the fire)'</td><td>wiliil-íta (F) 'smoke'</td></tr><tr><td>wó'a~wó'a=y-</td><td>'taste watery (e.g. bad potatoes,<br>bland oranges)'</td><td>wo'-á (M) 'water'</td></tr><tr><td>wóxe~wóxe=y-</td><td>'smell of sauce (e.g. the kitchen)'</td><td>wox-íta (F) 'sauce'</td></tr><tr><td>xágo~xágo=y-</td><td>'smell of spices (e.g. a person who<br>has seasoned butter)'</td><td>xag-úta (F) 'spices'</td></tr></tbody></table>

The construction might represent a metaphorical extension of the reported speech construction, in which a participant exuding a taste/smell is expressed as a speaker calling out the source of a taste/smell (note that vocatives are oblique case-marked).

<footnote n="47">⁴⁷ Of all examples presented in Table 17, only má'lle~má'lle=y- translated as 'taste naff and maxíne~maxíne=y- translated as 'become brackish' are found as entries in Alemu (2016: 691, 706).</footnote>
Table 17 gives an overview of all taste and smell constructions attested in my fieldwork data with different speakers; some of the examples were overheard, others elicited.<fnref n="47" /> All of them combine with y- ‘say’; combinations with a'- ‘do’ are unattested and were ruled out by a consulted native speaker.

<table><caption>**Table 17:** Transitory and vestigial tastes and smells.</caption><thead><tr><th>Ideophone</th><th>English</th><th>Origin</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>babbáro~babbáro=y-</td><td>'have a taste of pepper'</td><td>babbar-úta (F) 'hot<br>Ethiopian spice mixture'</td></tr><tr><td>gotí ále~ále=y-</td><td>'smell of hyena's body (e.g. a<br>person who does not wash)'</td><td>got-á (M) 'hyena', al-í (M)<br>'body'</td></tr><tr><td>háqqa~háqqa=y-</td><td>'have a bland taste, be boring (of a<br>talk)'</td><td>haqq-á (M) 'wood'</td></tr><tr><td>haráqe~haráqe=y-</td><td>'smell of brandy (e.g. a person who<br>is drunk)'</td><td>haraq-íta (F) 'brandy'</td></tr><tr><td>hixíchcho~hixíchcho=y-</td><td>'have a taste of lemongrass (e.g.<br>cheese)'</td><td>hixichch-ú (M) 'lemongrass'</td></tr><tr><td>hóolla~hóolla=y-</td><td>'smell of sheep (e.g. a person who<br>has been in the sheep pen)'</td><td>hooll-áta (F) 'sheep'</td></tr><tr><td>íchcha~íchcha=y-</td><td>'smell of food (e.g. a room)'</td><td>ichch-áta (F) 'food'</td></tr><tr><td>má'lle~má'lle=y- /<br>má'lla~má'lla=y-</td><td>'have a bland taste, lack spices'</td><td>ma'll-á (M) / ma'll-íta (F)<br>'bland food'</td></tr><tr><td>maxíne~maxíne=y-</td><td>'have a taste of salt'</td><td>maxin-íta (F) 'salt'</td></tr><tr><td>shá'lla~shá'lla=y-</td><td>'smell of cow dung (e.g. a person<br>who has mucked out the cowshed)'</td><td>sha'll-á (M) 'cow dung'</td></tr><tr><td>wilúile~wilúile=y-</td><td>'smell of smoke (e.g. clothes of a<br>person who has sat beside the fire)'</td><td>wiliil-íta (F) 'smoke'</td></tr><tr><td>wó'a~wó'a=y-</td><td>'taste watery (e.g. bad potatoes,<br>bland oranges)'</td><td>wo'-á (M) 'water'</td></tr><tr><td>wóxe~wóxe=y-</td><td>'smell of sauce (e.g. the kitchen)'</td><td>wox-íta (F) 'sauce'</td></tr><tr><td>xágo~xágo=y-</td><td>'smell of spices (e.g. a person who<br>has seasoned butter)'</td><td>xag-úta (F) 'spices'</td></tr></tbody></table>

The construction might represent a metaphorical extension of the reported speech construction, in which a participant exuding a taste/smell is expressed as a speaker calling out the source of a taste/smell (note that vocatives are oblique case-marked).

<footnote n="47">⁴⁷ Of all examples presented in Table 17, only má'lle~má'lle=y- translated as ‘taste naff and maxíne~maxíne=y- translated as ‘become brackish’ are found as entries in Alemu (2016: 691, 706).</footnote>
## 5. Ideophones – word class of its own or subclass of verbs?

The present paper has taken a language-internal morphosyntactic definition of ideophones as a point of departure and then studied the form, the meaning and the use of ideophones across recorded, written and elicited data. Even though there are no productive mechanisms to generate ideophones (ideophone formation through compounding and conversion is very limited), it has become clear that ideophones are an open word class with a potentially infinite number of members, as attested by the ~850 ideophonic lexemes provided in Alemu (2016) and the adhoc integration of ideophones from Amharic into Kambaata utterances (§3.6). It now remains to be discussed whether it is more appropriate to consider ideophones as a separate word class or to subsume them under verbs as a subtype. As we will see, there are arguments for both positions.

Ideophones are distinct from verbs in that they obligatorily need a support verb to be morphosyntactically integrated into an utterance; verbs do not combine with ‘say’ and ‘do’ to form complex predicates. Ideophones have lexically determined stress, while verbal stems are undetermined for stress – stress marking is introduced through inflectional morphology. Idiolectal phonological variation is much more common for ideophones than for verbs. Kambaata has two derivational processes, the adjectivizing, resultative derivation and the action noun derivation that take ideophones as input, while verbal inputs are unattested. Ideophone reduplication is much more prominent than verb reduplication (or more appropriate: repetition).

In contrast, ideophones and verbs also share a number of features. Most importantly, ideophone-support constructions and verbs are used in the same syntactic functions as predicates in main and subordinate clauses. Ideophones usually come in intransitive/transitive pairs (‘say’-‘do’-pairs) and their argument structure maps onto that of intransitive and transitive verbs – notwithstanding that ‘say’ in its independent use as a speech verb is not intransitive but transitive. If we leave aside the small number of onomatopoeic ideophones, there is little to no evidence that ideophones are phonologically or phonotactically unusual. Regarding their semantics, §3.5 has cast doubt on the initial assumption that ideophones are semantically narrower than (or otherwise different from) verbs.

Based on the commonalities of ideophones and verbs, one could justifiably postulate a word class of verbs, which divides into two formal subtypes, true (non-periphrastic) verbs and periphrastic verbs. True verbs can be inflected directly,
## 5. Ideophones – word class of its own or subclass of verbs?

The present paper has taken a language-internal morphosyntactic definition of ideophones as a point of departure and then studied the form, the meaning and the use of ideophones across recorded, written and elicited data. Even though there are no productive mechanisms to generate ideophones (ideophone formation through compounding and conversion is very limited), it has become clear that ideophones are an open word class with a potentially infinite number of members, as attested by the ~850 ideophonic lexemes provided in Alemu (2016) and the adhoc integration of ideophones from Amharic into Kambaata utterances (§3.6). It now remains to be discussed whether it is more appropriate to consider ideophones as a separate word class or to subsume them under verbs as a subtype. As we will see, there are arguments for both positions.

Ideophones are distinct from verbs in that they obligatorily need a support verb to be morphosyntactically integrated into an utterance; verbs do not combine with ‘say’ and ‘do’ to form complex predicates. Ideophones have lexically determined stress, while verbal stems are undetermined for stress – stress marking is introduced through inflectional morphology. Idiolectal phonological variation is much more common for ideophones than for verbs. Kambaata has two derivational processes, the adjectivizing, resultative derivation and the action noun derivation that take ideophones as input, while verbal inputs are unattested. Ideophone reduplication is much more prominent than verb reduplication (or more appropriate: repetition).

In contrast, ideophones and verbs also share a number of features. Most importantly, ideophone-support constructions and verbs are used in the same syntactic functions as predicates in main and subordinate clauses. Ideophones usually come in intransitive/transitive pairs (‘say’-‘do’-pairs) and their argument structure maps onto that of intransitive and transitive verbs – notwithstanding that ‘say’ in its independent use as a speech verb is not intransitive but transitive. If we leave aside the small number of onomatopoeic ideophones, there is little to no evidence that ideophones are phonologically or phonotactically unusual. Regarding their semantics, §3.5 has cast doubt on the initial assumption that ideophones are semantically narrower than (or otherwise different from) verbs.

Based on the commonalities of ideophones and verbs, one could justifiably postulate a word class of verbs, which divides into two formal subtypes, true (non-periphrastic) verbs and periphrastic verbs. True verbs can be inflected directly,
periphrastic verbs require a semantically empty support verb. A division into two subtypes of verbs might even be supported by evidence from language-internal variation and change as well as comparative evidence – recall that the Kambaata support verbs are enclitic in nature and that the segmental substance of y- ‘say’ is about to be lost. At present, the stress patterns (and the unique morphophonology of the ‘do’-verb) are often the most reliable indicator for identifying ideophone-support constructions (i.e. periphrastic verbs). Also in closely related Highland East Cushitic languages, the consonant root of the ‘say’ verb is on its way to being lost. One could speculate that the lack of attention paid to ideophones in the literature on Hadiyya is attributable to the fact that the ‘say’ verb is already completely absorbed and that the ‘do’-verb is interpreted as a transitivizing derivational morpheme. Overall, the support verbs are losing their independent status.

Having justified the existence of ideophones as a word class or sub-word class on language-internal ground, it remains to be determined whether Kambaata ideophones fit the comparative concept proposed by Dingemanse (2019: 16), namely “an open lexical class of marked words that depict sensory imagery”. As the openness of the word class and their structural markedness have been proven, I restrict my comments to the question of whether Kambaata ideophones “depict” and have “sensory meanings”. Only a subset of Kambaata ideophones seems iconic (see Treis & Deginet 2024 on sound-imitative ideophones and §3.4.3 on the iconic functions of reduplication); usually the mappings between forms and meaning are arbitrary. Nevertheless, as Dingemanse (2019: 19) points out for other languages, also Kambaata native speakers are adamant that the form of an ideophone is suggestive of its meaning. Dingemanse attributes this to the depictive nature of ideophones, which “invites and affords the construal of iconic mappings between form and meaning” (Dingemanse 2019: 18). Kambaata ideophones can express sounds (e.g. *xixí* ‘crackle when being roasted on the fire (of small seeds)’), movement (e.g. *túk=y* ‘walk behind each other in large groups’), visual patterns (e.g. *xéff~xéff=y* ‘have/be covered by small spots’), other sensory perceptions like texture (e.g. *lúf~lúf=y* ‘become soft, malleable, fluffy’) and color (e.g. *búll=y* ‘become greyish, ashen’), inner feelings and cognitive states (e.g. *cagágg=y* ‘become unwell, indisposed, a bit ill’; *kulúl=a'* ‘make feel dizzy’, *qúl~qúl=a'* ‘make (s.o.) feel nostalgic’) – i.e. Kambaata covers the whole implicational hierarchy of semantic fields proposed by Dingemanse (2012: 663) – but I find it difficult to judge whether
periphrastic verbs require a semantically empty support verb. A division into two subtypes of verbs might even be supported by evidence from language-internal variation and change as well as comparative evidence – recall that the Kambaata support verbs are enclitic in nature and that the segmental substance of y- ‘say’ is about to be lost. At present, the stress patterns (and the unique morphophonology of the ‘do’-verb) are often the most reliable indicator for identifying ideophone-support constructions (i.e. periphrastic verbs). Also in closely related Highland East Cushitic languages, the consonant root of the ‘say’ verb is on its way to being lost. One could speculate that the lack of attention paid to ideophones in the literature on Hadiyya is attributable to the fact that the ‘say’ verb is already completely absorbed and that the ‘do’-verb is interpreted as a transitivizing derivational morpheme. Overall, the support verbs are losing their independent status.

Having justified the existence of ideophones as a word class or sub-word class on language-internal ground, it remains to be determined whether Kambaata ideophones fit the comparative concept proposed by Dingemanse (2019: 16), namely “an open lexical class of marked words that depict sensory imagery”. As the openness of the word class and their structural markedness have been proven, I restrict my comments to the question of whether Kambaata ideophones “depict” and have “sensory meanings”. Only a subset of Kambaata ideophones seems iconic (see Treis & Deginet 2024 on sound-imitative ideophones and §3.4.3 on the iconic functions of reduplication); usually the mappings between forms and meaning are arbitrary. Nevertheless, as Dingemanse (2019: 19) points out for other languages, also Kambaata native speakers are adamant that the form of an ideophone is suggestive of its meaning. Dingemanse attributes this to the depictive nature of ideophones, which “invites and affords the construal of iconic mappings between form and meaning” (Dingemanse 2019: 18). Kambaata ideophones can express sounds (e.g. *xixí* ‘crackle when being roasted on the fire (of small seeds)’), movement (e.g. *túk=y* ‘walk behind each other in large groups’), visual patterns (e.g. *xéff~xéff=y* ‘have/be covered by small spots’), other sensory perceptions like texture (e.g. *lúf~lúf=y* ‘become soft, malleable, fluffy’) and color (e.g. *búll=y* ‘become greyish, ashen’), inner feelings and cognitive states (e.g. *cagágg=y* ‘become unwell, indisposed, a bit ill’; *kulúl=a'* ‘make feel dizzy’, *qúl~qúl=a'* ‘make (s.o.) feel nostalgic’) – i.e. Kambaata covers the whole implicational hierarchy of semantic fields proposed by Dingemanse (2012: 663) – but I find it difficult to judge whether
Kambaata ideophones have closer ties to sensory perception than verbal lexemes. A more fine-grained semantic analysis of ideophones and verbs is definitely required.

Of course, this is not the only gap that remains. This paper hopefully paves the way for in-depth investigations of some of the aspects presented above. I was, for instance, neither able to do justice to the (possibly) substantial Kambaata-internal regional variation in the form and meaning of ideophones nor to the (presumably) significant differences in the frequency of use of ideophones across text types and across speakers. The degree of cognacy of ideophones across closely related languages is also a question that would merit to be investigated in the future.

## Acknowledgements

Work on this article was supported by a public grant overseen by the French National Research Agency (ANR) as part of the program "Investissement d'Avenir" (ANR-10-LABX-0083). It contributes to the IdEx Université de Paris (ANR-18-IDEX-0001). I am indebted to my language assistant Deginet Wotango Doyiso (abbreviated DWD in the examples above) for the intensive and fruitful discussions of the analyses proposed here, and to Alemu Bantu Atara (also spelt: Alamu Banta Ataara) for granting me access to his voluminous dictionary. I am grateful to all the Kambaata speakers I have been working with in the past years and who have contributed data that was analyzed for this paper; special thanks go, in alphabetical order, to Abel Yonas Zekarias (AYZ), Aman Nuriye (AN), Belachew Nuramo (BN), Ermias Kenore (EK), Teshome Dagne (TD), Tessema Handiso (TH) and Yoseph Yonas Zecharias (YYZ). Thanks to Martine Vanhove, the anonymous reviewers and the co-editors of this special issue for helpful comments on an earlier version of this paper.

## Abbreviations

1 = first person

2 = second person

3 = third person

A_ = adjectival

ABL = ablative

ACC = accusative

ACT = action

nominalization

ADD = additive

ADJ = adjective

AMH = Amharic

APPR = apprehensive

BDV = benedictive

CAUS1 = short causative

CAUS2 = long causative

CIRC = circumstantial

COND = conditional

COP2 = ascriptive, identificational copula
-(h)a(a) (M) / -ta(a) (F)

CVB = converb
Kambaata ideophones have closer ties to sensory perception than verbal lexemes. A more fine-grained semantic analysis of ideophones and verbs is definitely required.

Of course, this is not the only gap that remains. This paper hopefully paves the way for in-depth investigations of some of the aspects presented above. I was, for instance, neither able to do justice to the (possibly) substantial Kambaata-internal regional variation in the form and meaning of ideophones nor to the (presumably) significant differences in the frequency of use of ideophones across text types and across speakers. The degree of cognacy of ideophones across closely related languages is also a question that would merit to be investigated in the future.

## Acknowledgements

Work on this article was supported by a public grant overseen by the French National Research Agency (ANR) as part of the program "Investissement d'Avenir" (ANR-10-LABX-0083). It contributes to the IdEx Université de Paris (ANR-18-IDEX-0001). I am indebted to my language assistant Deginet Wotango Doyiso (abbreviated DWD in the examples above) for the intensive and fruitful discussions of the analyses proposed here, and to Alemu Bantu Atara (also spelt: Alamu Banta Ataara) for granting me access to his voluminous dictionary. I am grateful to all the Kambaata speakers I have been working with in the past years and who have contributed data that was analyzed for this paper; special thanks go, in alphabetical order, to Abel Yonas Zekarias (AYZ), Aman Nuriye (AN), Belachew Nuramo (BN), Ermias Kenore (EK), Teshome Dagne (TD), Tessema Handiso (TH) and Yoseph Yonas Zecharias (YYZ). Thanks to Martine Vanhove, the anonymous reviewers and the co-editors of this special issue for helpful comments on an earlier version of this paper.

## Abbreviations

1 = first person

2 = second person

3 = third person

A_ = adjectival

ABL = ablative

ACC = accusative

ACT = action

nominalization

ADD = additive

ADJ = adjective

AMH = Amharic

APPR = apprehensive

BDV = benedictive

CAUS1 = short causative

CAUS2 = long causative

CIRC = circumstantial

COND = conditional

COP2 = ascriptive, identificational copula
-(h)a(a) (M) / -ta(a) (F)

CVB = converb
DAT = dative

DEF = definite

DEM1 = proximal

demonstrative

DEM2 = medial

demonstrative

DS = different subject

EMP = emphasis

F = feminine

GEN = genitive

HON = honorific;

impersonal

ICP = instrumental-

comitative-perlative

IDEO = ideophone

IMP = imperative

ITER = iterative

INTJ = interjection

MID = middle

MIT = mitigator

MULT = multiplicative

NEG1 = standard negator

NEG2 = imperative negator

NEG4 = converb negator

NEG5 = relative negator

NIPFV = non-imperfective

NMZ1 = nominalization

with -V

NMZ4 = nominalizer =r-

NOM = nominative

OBJ = object pronoun

OBL = oblique

P_ = pronominal

PART = discourse particle

PASS = passive

PAST = past,

counterfactuality

PFV = perfective

PL = plural

PLC = place nominalization

POSS = possessive

PRED = predicative

PRF = perfect

PROG = progressive

Q = question marker

REAS2 = reason clause

marker =biiha

RED = reduplication

REL = relative

RES = resultative derivation

SEQ = sequential

SGV = singulative

SIM = similative

vi/vt = intransitive /

transitive verb

VOC = vocative

References

Alamu Banta & Alamaayyo G/Tsiyoon. 2017. *Hambarrichcho yaanata: Kambaatissa-Amaarsa hayyo'ooma yannaakkata* [Spices of Mount Hambarrichcho: Kambaata-Amharic proverbs]. Addis Ababa: Addis Ababa University.

Alamu Banta Ataara. 2022. *Daambiliiqa: Kambaatissa finka* [Intellectual advancement: Kambaata metaphors]. Duuraame: [n. p.].

Alemu Banta Atara [Alamu Banta Ataara]. 2016. *Kookaata: Kambaatissa-Amaarsa-Ingiliizissa laaga doonnuta* [Kambaata-Amharic-English dictionary]. Addis Ababa: Berhanena Selam Printing.

Amina Zaro. 2013. *Ideophones in Oromo*. Master Thesis, University of Addis Ababa.

Appleyard, David L. 2001. The verb “to say” as a verb ‘recycling device’ in Ethiopian languages. In Andrzej Zaborski (ed.), *New data and new methods in Afroasiatic linguistics. Robert Hetzron in memoriam*, 1–11. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.

Banti, Giorgio & Moreno Vergari. 2005. A sketch of Saho grammar. *Journal of Eritrean Studies* 4(1–2). 101–131.

Cabdulqaadir Salaad Dhoorre & Mauro Tosco. 1998. 111 Somali ideophones. *Journal of African Cultural Studies* 11(2). 125–156.
DAT = dative

DEF = definite

DEM1 = proximal

demonstrative

DEM2 = medial

demonstrative

DS = different subject

EMP = emphasis

F = feminine

GEN = genitive

HON = honorific;

impersonal

ICP = instrumental-

comitative-perlative

IDEO = ideophone

IMP = imperative

ITER = iterative

INTJ = interjection

MID = middle

MIT = mitigator

MULT = multiplicative

NEG1 = standard negator

NEG2 = imperative negator

NEG4 = converb negator

NEG5 = relative negator

NIPFV = non-imperfective

NMZ1 = nominalization

with -V

NMZ4 = nominalizer =r-

NOM = nominative

OBJ = object pronoun

OBL = oblique

P_ = pronominal

PART = discourse particle

PASS = passive

PAST = past,

counterfactuality

PFV = perfective

PL = plural

PLC = place nominalization

POSS = possessive

PRED = predicative

PRF = perfect

PROG = progressive

Q = question marker

REAS2 = reason clause

marker =biha

RED = reduplication

REL = relative

RES = resultative derivation

SEQ = sequential

SGV = singulative

SIM = similative

vi/vt = intransitive /

transitive verb

VOC = vocative

References

Alamu Banta & Alamaayyo G/Tsiyoon. 2017. *Hambarrichcho yaanata: Kambaatissa-Amaarsa hayyo'ooma yannaakkata* [Spices of Mount Hambarrichcho: Kambaata-Amharic proverbs]. Addis Ababa: Addis Ababa University.

Alamu Banta Ataara. 2022. *Daambiliiqa: Kambaatissa finka* [Intellectual advancement: Kambaata metaphors]. Duuraame: [n. p.].

Alemu Banta Atara [Alamu Banta Ataara]. 2016. *Kookaata: Kambaatissa-Amaarsa-Ingiliizissa laaga doonnuta* [Kambaata-Amharic-English dictionary]. Addis Ababa: Berhanena Selam Printing.

Amina Zaro. 2013. *Ideophones in Oromo*. Master Thesis, University of Addis Ababa.

Appleyard, David L. 2001. The verb “to say” as a verb ‘recycling device’ in Ethiopian languages. In Andrzej Zaborski (ed.), *New data and new methods in Afroasiatic linguistics. Robert Hetzron in memoriam*, 1–11. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.

Banti, Giorgio & Moreno Vergari. 2005. A sketch of Saho grammar. *Journal of Eritrean Studies* 4(1–2). 101–131.

Cabdulqaadir Salaad Dhoorre & Mauro Tosco. 1998. 111 Somali ideophones. *Journal of African Cultural Studies* 11(2). 125–156.
Carle, Eric. 1984. *The mixed-up chameleon*. New York: Harper Collins.

Central Statistical Agency. 2007. Ethiopia: Population and housing census of 2007. http://catalog.ihsn.org/index.php/catalog/3583 (Last access: 4 January 2020).

Cohen, David, Marie-Claude Simeone-Senelle & Martine Vanhove. 2002. The grammaticalization of “say” and “do”: An areal phenomenon in East Africa. In Tom Güldemann & Manfred von Roncador (eds.), *Reported discourse. A meeting ground for different linguistic domains*, 227–251. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Crass, Joachim. 2005. *Das K'abeena. Deskriptive Grammatik einer hochlandost-kuschitischen Sprache*. Cologne: Rüdiger Köppe.

Crass, Joachim. n.d. [Collection of transcribed, glossed and translated Libido texts].

Darmon, Chloé. 2015. *A morphosyntactic description of Xamtanga, an Agaw (Central Cushitic) language of the northern Ethiopian highlands*. Doctoral dissertation, Université Lumière Lyon 2.

Desalegn Haile Arficho. 2020. *Ideophones in Kambaata*. Doctoral dissertation, Addis Ababa University.

Dingemanse, Mark. 2012. Advances in the cross-linguistic study of ideophones. *Language and Linguistics Compass* 6(10). 654–672.

Dingemanse, Mark. 2019. “Ideophone” as a comparative concept. In Kimi Akita & Prashant Pardeshi (eds.), *Ideophones, mimentics and expressives*, 13–56. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Eyob Kelemework Wolde. 2015. *A grammar of Gedeo: A Cushitic language of Ethiopia*. Doctoral dissertation, Osmania University, Hyderabad.

Ferguson, Charles A. 1976. The Ethiopian language area. In M. Lionel Bender, J. D. Bowen, R. L. Cooper & C. A. Ferguson (eds.), *Language in Ethiopia*, 63–76. London: Oxford University Press.

Geetaahun Heelleebo Baachchoore. 2002. *Kambaatissa afgale maxaafa* [Collection of Kambaata oral literature]. Tungu: Kambaatina Xambaaro Zoonaan, Dooyyoganni Woradaan, Maare-Ammaachcho Waato.

Girum Tesfaye. 2013. *Ideophones in Sidaama: Documentation and description*. Master Thesis, University of Addis Ababa.

Güldemann, Tom. 2005. Complex predicates based on generic auxiliaries as an areal feature in Northeast Africa. In F. K. Erhard Voeltz (ed.), *Studies in African linguistic typology*, 131–154. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Hassan Kamil, Mohamed. 2015. *L'afar: Description grammaticale d'une langues couchitique (Djibouti, Erythrée et Éthiopie)*. Doctoral dissertation, Inalco, Paris.
Carle, Eric. 1984. *The mixed-up chameleon*. New York: Harper Collins.

Central Statistical Agency. 2007. Ethiopia: Population and housing census of 2007. http://catalog.ihsn.org/index.php/catalog/3583 (Last access: 4 January 2020).

Cohen, David, Marie-Claude Simeone-Senelle & Martine Vanhove. 2002. The grammaticalization of “say” and “do”: An areal phenomenon in East Africa. In Tom Güldemann & Manfred von Roncador (eds.), *Reported discourse. A meeting ground for different linguistic domains*, 227–251. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Crass, Joachim. 2005. *Das K'abeena. Deskriptive Grammatik einer hochlandost-kuschitischen Sprache*. Cologne: Rüdiger Köppe.

Crass, Joachim. n.d. [Collection of transcribed, glossed and translated Libido texts].

Darmon, Chloé. 2015. *A morphosyntactic description of Xamtanga, an Agaw (Central Cushitic) language of the northern Ethiopian highlands*. Doctoral dissertation, Université Lumière Lyon 2.

Desalegn Haile Arficho. 2020. *Ideophones in Kambaata*. Doctoral dissertation, Addis Ababa University.

Dingemanse, Mark. 2012. Advances in the cross-linguistic study of ideophones. *Language and Linguistics Compass* 6(10). 654–672.

Dingemanse, Mark. 2019. “Ideophone” as a comparative concept. In Kimi Akita & Prashant Pardeshi (eds.), *Ideophones, mimentics and expressives*, 13–56. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Eyob Kelemework Wolde. 2015. *A grammar of Gedeo: A Cushitic language of Ethiopia*. Doctoral dissertation, Osmania University, Hyderabad.

Ferguson, Charles A. 1976. The Ethiopian language area. In M. Lionel Bender, J. D. Bowen, R. L. Cooper & C. A. Ferguson (eds.), *Language in Ethiopia*, 63–76. London: Oxford University Press.

Geetaahun Heelleebo Baachchoore. 2002. *Kambaatissa afgale maxaafa* [Collection of Kambaata oral literature]. Tungu: Kambaatina Xambaaro Zoonaan, Dooyyoganni Woradaan, Maare-Ammaachcho Waato.

Girum Tesfaye. 2013. *Ideophones in Sidaama: Documentation and description*. Master Thesis, University of Addis Ababa.

Güldemann, Tom. 2005. Complex predicates based on generic auxiliaries as an areal feature in Northeast Africa. In F. K. Erhard Voeltz (ed.), *Studies in African linguistic typology*, 131–154. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Hassan Kamil, Mohamed. 2015. *L'afar: Description grammaticale d'une langues couchitique (Djibouti, Erythrée et Éthiopie)*. Doctoral dissertation, Inalco, Paris.
Hudson, Grover. 1976. Highland East Cushitic. In M. Lionel Bender (ed.), *The non-Semitic languages of Ethiopia*, 232–77. East Lansing, MI: African Studies Center, Michigan State University.

Hudson, Grover. 1989. *Highland East Cushitic dictionary*. Hamburg: Buske.

Kambaata and Hadiyya Translation Project Hosaina. 2005. *Qarichcho Yesuus Kiristoositannee Yohannis xaaffo Mishiraachchi Maxaafa / Latin version of the Gospel of John in Kambaata language*. Addis Ababa: The Bible Society of Ethiopia.

Kambaata Education Bureau. 1989. *Kambaatissata: Rosaanchi maxaafa* [Kambaata language: School book]. 8 vols. Hawassa: Southern Nations, Nationalities, and Peoples Regional State.

Kane, Thomas Leiper. 1990. *Amharic-English dictionary*. 2 vols. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.

Kawachi, Kazuhiro. 2007. *A grammar of Sidaama (Sidamo), a Cushitic language of Ethiopia*. Buffalo: State University of New York at Buffalo (Doctoral Dissertation).

Leslau, Wolf. 1945. The influence of Cushitic on the Semitic languages of Ethiopia: A problem of substratum. *Word* 1(1). 59–82.

Mayer, Mercer. 1969. *Frog, where are you?* New York: Dial Press.

Mous, Maarten. 1993. *A grammar of Iraqw*. Hamburg: Buske.

Mous, Maarten. 2012. Cushitic. In Zygmunt Frajzyngier & Erin Shay (eds.), *Afroasiatic languages*, 342–422. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Mous, Maarten. 2016. *Alagwa - a South Cushitic language of Tanzania: Grammar, texts and lexicon* (Cushitic and Omotic Studies 7). Cologne: Rüdiger Köppe.

Ongaye Oda Orkaydo. 2013. *A grammar of Konso*. Utrecht: LOT.

Schneider-Blum, Gertrud. 2007. *A grammar of Alaaba. A Highland East Cushitic language of Ethiopia*. Cologne: Rüdiger Köppe.

Tadesse Sibamo Garkebo. 2015. *Documentation and description of Hadiyya (a Highland East Cushitic language of Ethiopia)*. Master Thesis, University of Addis Ababa.

Tesfaye Baye Assefa. 2015. *A descriptive grammar of Burji*. Doctoral dissertation, University of Addis Ababa.

Tosco, Mauro. 2006. The ideophones in Gawwada. In Siegbert Uhlig (ed.), *Proceedings of the XVth International Conference of Ethiopian Studies, Hamburg, July 20-25, 2003*, 885–892. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.

Treis, Yvonne. 2008. *A grammar of Kambaata. Part 1: Phonology, morphology, and non-verbal predication*. Cologne: Rüdiger Köppe.
Hudson, Grover. 1976. Highland East Cushitic. In M. Lionel Bender (ed.), *The non-Semitic languages of Ethiopia*, 232–77. East Lansing, MI: African Studies Center, Michigan State University.

Hudson, Grover. 1989. *Highland East Cushitic dictionary*. Hamburg: Buske.

Kambaata and Hadiyya Translation Project Hosaina. 2005. *Qarichcho Yesuus Kiristoositannee Yohannis xaaffo Mishiraachchi Maxaafa / Latin version of the Gospel of John in Kambaata language*. Addis Ababa: The Bible Society of Ethiopia.

Kambaata Education Bureau. 1989. *Kambaatissata: Rosaanchi maxaafa* [Kambaata language: School book]. 8 vols. Hawassa: Southern Nations, Nationalities, and Peoples Regional State.

Kane, Thomas Leiper. 1990. *Amharic-English dictionary*. 2 vols. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.

Kawachi, Kazuhiro. 2007. *A grammar of Sidaama (Sidamo), a Cushitic language of Ethiopia*. Buffalo: State University of New York at Buffalo (Doctoral Dissertation).

Leslau, Wolf. 1945. The influence of Cushitic on the Semitic languages of Ethiopia: A problem of substratum. *Word* 1(1). 59–82.

Mayer, Mercer. 1969. *Frog, where are you?* New York: Dial Press.

Mous, Maarten. 1993. *A grammar of Iraqw*. Hamburg: Buske.

Mous, Maarten. 2012. Cushitic. In Zygmunt Frajzyngier & Erin Shay (eds.), *Afroasiatic languages*, 342–422. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Mous, Maarten. 2016. *Alagwa - a South Cushitic language of Tanzania: Grammar, texts and lexicon* (Cushitic and Omotic Studies 7). Cologne: Rüdiger Köppe.

Ongaye Oda Orkaydo. 2013. *A grammar of Konso*. Utrecht: LOT.

Schneider-Blum, Gertrud. 2007. *A grammar of Alaaba. A Highland East Cushitic language of Ethiopia*. Cologne: Rüdiger Köppe.

Tadesse Sibamo Garkebo. 2015. *Documentation and description of Hadiyya (a Highland East Cushitic language of Ethiopia)*. Master Thesis, University of Addis Ababa.

Tesfaye Baye Assefa. 2015. *A descriptive grammar of Burji*. Doctoral dissertation, University of Addis Ababa.

Tosco, Mauro. 2006. The ideophones in Gawwada. In Siegbert Uhlig (ed.), *Proceedings of the XVth International Conference of Ethiopian Studies, Hamburg, July 20-25, 2003*, 885–892. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.

Treis, Yvonne. 2008. *A grammar of Kambaata. Part 1: Phonology, morphology, and non-verbal predication*. Cologne: Rüdiger Köppe.
Treis, Yvonne. 2012. Kambaata children's songs and word games: Or what can we learn about the grammar of Kambaata by analysing marginal literature genres? *Afrikanistik Online*. 2012.

Treis, Yvonne. 2017. "They are only two, like the teats of a donkey": Kambataa denumerals revisited. In Raija Kramer & Roland Kießling (eds.), *Mechthildian approaches to Afrikanistik: Advances in language based research on Africa: Festschrift für Mechthild Reh*, 339–366. Cologne: Rüdiger Köppe.

Treis, Yvonne. 2019. Similative and equative demonstratives in Kambaata. *Faits de Langues* 51(1). 75–201.

Treis, Yvonne. 2022. Verbal derivation in Kambaata (Cushitic), with a focus on the encoding of noncausal/causal alternations. *Linguistique et langues africaines* 8(2) (Special issue “The noncausal-causal alternation in African languages”, ed. by Sebastian Dom, Leora Bar-el, Ponsiano Sawaka Kanijo & Malin Petzell). 1–36. https://doi.org/10.4000/lla.4535.

Treis, Yvonne. 2023a. [13.] Kambaata. In Ronny Meyer, Bedilu Wakjira & Zelealem Leyew (eds.), *The Oxford handbook of Ethiopian languages*, 198–226. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780198728542.013.13.

Treis, Yvonne. 2023b. Reflexive constructions in Kambaata. In Katarzyna Janic, Nicoletta Puddu & Martin Haspelmath (eds.), *Reflexive constructions in the world's languages*, 155–184. Berlin: Language Science Press. https://dx.doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7861660.

Treis, Yvonne & Deginet Wotango Doyiso. 2024. Onomatopoeias in Kambaata. In Lívia Körtvélyessy (ed.), *Onomatopoeias* (Comparative Handbooks of Linguistics), 81–92. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.

Vanhove, Martine. 2017. *Le bedja*. Leuven: Peeters.

Zaborski, Andrzej. 1991. Ethiopian language subareas. In Stanisław Piłaszewicz & Eugeniusz Rzewuski (eds.), *Unwritten testimonies of the African past. Proceedings of the International Symposium held in Ojrzanów n. Warsaw on 07-08 November 1989*, 123–134. Warsaw: Wydawnictwa Uniwersytetu Warszawskiego.

CONTACT

yvonne.treis@cnrs.fr
Treis, Yvonne. 2012. Kambaata children's songs and word games: Or what can we learn about the grammar of Kambaata by analysing marginal literature genres? *Afrikanistik Online*. 2012.

Treis, Yvonne. 2017. "They are only two, like the teats of a donkey": Kambataa denumerals revisited. In Raija Kramer & Roland Kießling (eds.), *Mechthildian approaches to Afrikanistik: Advances in language based research on Africa: Festschrift für Mechthild Reh*, 339–366. Cologne: Rüdiger Köppe.

Treis, Yvonne. 2019. Similative and equative demonstratives in Kambaata. *Faits de Langues* 51(1). 75–201.

Treis, Yvonne. 2022. Verbal derivation in Kambaata (Cushitic), with a focus on the encoding of noncausal/causal alternations. *Linguistique et langues africaines* 8(2) (Special issue “The noncausal-causal alternation in African languages”, ed. by Sebastian Dom, Leora Bar-el, Ponsiano Sawaka Kanijo & Malin Petzell). 1–36. https://doi.org/10.4000/lla.4535.

Treis, Yvonne. 2023a. [13.] Kambaata. In Ronny Meyer, Bedilu Wakjira & Zelealem Leyew (eds.), *The Oxford handbook of Ethiopian languages*, 198–226. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780198728542.013.13.

Treis, Yvonne. 2023b. Reflexive constructions in Kambaata. In Katarzyna Janic, Nicoletta Puddu & Martin Haspelmath (eds.), *Reflexive constructions in the world's languages*, 155–184. Berlin: Language Science Press. https://dx.doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7861660.

Treis, Yvonne & Deginet Wotango Doyiso. 2024. Onomatopoeias in Kambaata. In Lívia Körtvélyessy (ed.), *Onomatopoeias* (Comparative Handbooks of Linguistics), 81–92. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.

Vanhove, Martine. 2017. *Le bedja*. Leuven: Peeters.

Zaborski, Andrzej. 1991. Ethiopian language subareas. In Stanisław Piłaszewicz & Eugeniusz Rzewuski (eds.), *Unwritten testimonies of the African past. Proceedings of the International Symposium held in Ojrzanów n. Warsaw on 07-08 November 1989*, 123–134. Warsaw: Wydawnictwa Uniwersytetu Warszawskiego.

CONTACT

yvonne.treis@cnrs.fr
# Ideophones and verbal constructions with the verb ‘say’ in Amharic

RONNY MEYER

INALCO & CNRS, UMR 8135 LANGAGE, LANGUES ET CULTURES D'AFRIQUE

Submitted: 16/02/2023 Revised version: 7/02/2024

Accepted: 8/02/2024 Published: 12/06/2024

<figure><img src="image_20.png" /></figure>

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

Amharic (Ethiosemitic) has verbal predicates of two types: (i) verbs derived from a consonantal root and (ii) complex predicates consisting of an invariant coverb followed by an inflecting light verb, most commonly the verb *alä* ‘say’. Although complex predicates have been discussed in several descriptions of Amharic, little attention has been paid to the different word classes that occur as coverbs and the differences in their morphosyntactic behavior. This is also true for ideophones, which are often mentioned in the discussion of complex predicates, but without stating whether they form a distinct lexical class in Amharic and how this class can be characterized. This article describes the various elements that function as coverbs in complex predicates and provides a language-internal morphosyntactic definition of ideophones as a word class in Amharic. It is argued that only an ideophonic coverb can form noncausal/causal complex predicate pairs with the light verbs *alä* ‘say’ and *adärrägä* ‘do’. In addition to basic ideophonic lexemes, Amharic can also derive ideophones from verbal roots through dedicated templates expressing intensification or attenuation of the event denoted by the root. Amharic ideophones rarely occur on their own, but are typically morphosyntactically integrated by light verbs. Finally, a comparison of different types of coverbs in Amharic with those in other Ethiosemitic languages shows that the languages that are geographically close to or in close contact with Amharic have a similarly large variety of coverbs, while the Ethiosemitic languages that are further away have a more limited inventory.

**Keywords:** Amharic; Ethiosemitic; complex predicates; coverb; verb ‘say’; ideophone
# Ideophones and verbal constructions with the verb ‘say’ in Amharic

RONNY MEYER

INALCO & CNRS, UMR 8135 LANGAGE, LANGUES ET CULTURES D'AFRIQUE

Submitted: 16/02/2023 Revised version: 7/02/2024

Accepted: 8/02/2024 Published: 12/06/2024

<figure><img src="image_20.png" /></figure>

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

Amharic (Ethiosemitic) has verbal predicates of two types: (i) verbs derived from a consonantal root and (ii) complex predicates consisting of an invariant coverb followed by an inflecting light verb, most commonly the verb *alä* ‘say’. Although complex predicates have been discussed in several descriptions of Amharic, little attention has been paid to the different word classes that occur as coverbs and the differences in their morphosyntactic behavior. This is also true for ideophones, which are often mentioned in the discussion of complex predicates, but without stating whether they form a distinct lexical class in Amharic and how this class can be characterized. This article describes the various elements that function as coverbs in complex predicates and provides a language-internal morphosyntactic definition of ideophones as a word class in Amharic. It is argued that only an ideophonic coverb can form noncausal/causal complex predicate pairs with the light verbs *alä* ‘say’ and *adärrägä* ‘do’. In addition to basic ideophonic lexemes, Amharic can also derive ideophones from verbal roots through dedicated templates expressing intensification or attenuation of the event denoted by the root. Amharic ideophones rarely occur on their own, but are typically morphosyntactically integrated by light verbs. Finally, a comparison of different types of coverbs in Amharic with those in other Ethiosemitic languages shows that the languages that are geographically close to or in close contact with Amharic have a similarly large variety of coverbs, while the Ethiosemitic languages that are further away have a more limited inventory.

**Keywords:** Amharic; Ethiosemitic; complex predicates; coverb; verb ‘say’; ideophone
# 1. Introduction

Amharic (amh; Afroasiatic, Semitic)<fnref n="1" /> is an Ethiosemitic language and a lingua franca of Ethiopia, a country with an estimated population of 110 million inhabitants in 2018. Ethiopia has over 80 languages belonging to two traditional language phyla: Afroasiatic which includes various Cushitic, Semitic and Omotic languages, and Nilo-Saharan (see Eberhard et al. 2022: 7). Approximately 57 million people speak Amharic in Ethiopia, with 25 million being second language speakers (Eberhard et al. 2022: 13). The language is native to the Amhara Regional State in northern Ethiopia, as well as to the Ethiopian capital Addis Ababa and many other cities throughout the country. Due to its extensive use in primary education and as the working language of the Ethiopian government, Amharic has spread beyond its native-speaking region (see Meyer 2011a). The language is relatively well described, with its first grammar and dictionary dating back to 1698 (Ludolf 1698a; 1698b). It has a rich literary tradition, particularly since the late 19th century (see Meyer 2011b: 1178–1180).

Amharic and over ten other languages constitute the Ethiosemitic branch within the Semitic language family, which belongs to the Afroasiatic language phylum (see Huehnergard & Pat-El 2019: 3–4; Hudson 2013: 6–36). Hetzron (1972: 119; 1977: 15–24) classifies the Ethiosemitic languages into three major groups, as shown in Figure 1 with minor modifications (for critical points regarding this classification, see Meyer 2018: 94–95).

## North Ethiosemitic

†Geez (gez), Tigre (tig), Tigrinya (tir), Dahaalik (dlk)

## Transversal Ethiosemitic

a. Amharic (amh), Argobba (agj)

b. Harari (har), East Gurage [EG]: Zay (zwa), Wolane (wle), Silt'e (stv)

## South Ethiosemitic

a. †Gafat (gft)

<footnote n="1">¹ The languages cited are classified genealogically according to Glottolog and marked with their ISO-code 639-3 upon first mention.</footnote>
# 1. Introduction

Amharic (amh; Afroasiatic, Semitic)<fnref n="1" /> is an Ethiosemitic language and a lingua franca of Ethiopia, a country with an estimated population of 110 million inhabitants in 2018. Ethiopia has over 80 languages belonging to two traditional language phyla: Afroasiatic which includes various Cushitic, Semitic and Omotic languages, and Nilo-Saharan (see Eberhard et al. 2022: 7). Approximately 57 million people speak Amharic in Ethiopia, with 25 million being second language speakers (Eberhard et al. 2022: 13). The language is native to the Amhara Regional State in northern Ethiopia, as well as to the Ethiopian capital Addis Ababa and many other cities throughout the country. Due to its extensive use in primary education and as the working language of the Ethiopian government, Amharic has spread beyond its native-speaking region (see Meyer 2011a). The language is relatively well described, with its first grammar and dictionary dating back to 1698 (Ludolf 1698a; 1698b). It has a rich literary tradition, particularly since the late 19th century (see Meyer 2011b: 1178–1180).

Amharic and over ten other languages constitute the Ethiosemitic branch within the Semitic language family, which belongs to the Afroasiatic language phylum (see Huehnergard & Pat-El 2019: 3–4; Hudson 2013: 6–36). Hetzron (1972: 119; 1977: 15–24) classifies the Ethiosemitic languages into three major groups, as shown in Figure 1 with minor modifications (for critical points regarding this classification, see Meyer 2018: 94–95).

## North Ethiosemitic

†Geez (gez), Tigre (tig), Tigrinya (tir), Dahaalik (dlk)

## Transversal Ethiosemitic

a. Amharic (amh), Argobba (agj)

b. Harari (har), East Gurage [EG]: Zay (zwa), Wolane (wle), Silt'e (stv)

## South Ethiosemitic

a. †Gafat (gft)

<footnote n="1">¹ The languages cited are classified genealogically according to Glottolog and marked with their ISO-code 639-3 upon first mention.</footnote>
b. Gunnän Gurage [GG]

i. Northern Gurage: Muher (sgw), Kistane (gru), Dobbi (gru)

ii. Mesqan (mvz)

iii. Chaha group: Chaha, Gumer, Ezha, Gura (all sgw)

iv. Inor group: Inor, Enär, Gyeta, Endegagn (all ior),
†Mesmes (mys)

<caption>**Figure 1:** Major branches of Ethiosemitic (Afroasiatic, Semitic)</caption>

The geographical distribution of the Ethiosemitic languages is shown in Figure 2.

As for the general typological profile, the common constituent order is S(ubject)-O(bject)-V(erb), head nouns always follow their modifiers, but case relators may precede, follow, or enclose their complement. Amharic is a nominative-accusative language in which only the accusative is marked obligatorily on definite nouns (1b), whereas indefinite nouns as primary object are most typically unmarked (1a). Verbs obligatorily index their subject and may optionally also index the primary object (1b), or an applied object (1c).<fnref n="2" /> Differential object marking is common.

(1) a. almaz mäkina fät'-ättf
Almaz.F car sell\PFV-SBJ.3SF
'Almaz sold a car.'

b. almaz mäkina-w-n fät'-ättf(-iw)
Almaz.F car-DEF.M/POSS.3SM sell\PFV-SBJ.3SF(-OBJ.3SM)
'Almaz sold the/his car.'

c. tilant mäkina-w-n fät'-ättf-ibb-ijij
yesterday car-DEF.M/POSS.3SM sell\PFV-SBJ.3SF(-MIL-OBJ.3SM)
'Yesterday, she sold the/his car to my detriment.'

<footnote n="2">² The Amharic data is transcribed and transliterated with IPA symbols, except for the open-mid central vowel, which is represented by ä.</footnote>
b. Gunnän Gurage [GG]

i. Northern Gurage: Muher (sgw), Kistane (gru), Dobbi (gru)

ii. Mesqan (mvz)

iii. Chaha group: Chaha, Gumer, Ezha, Gura (all sgw)

iv. Inor group: Inor, Enär, Gyeta, Endegagn (all ior),
†Mesmes (mys)

<caption>**Figure 1:** Major branches of Ethiosemitic (Afroasiatic, Semitic)</caption>

The geographical distribution of the Ethiosemitic languages is shown in Figure 2.

As for the general typological profile, the common constituent order is S(ubject)-O(bject)-V(erb), head nouns always follow their modifiers, but case relators may precede, follow, or enclose their complement. Amharic is a nominative-accusative language in which only the accusative is marked obligatorily on definite nouns (1b), whereas indefinite nouns as primary object are most typically unmarked (1a). Verbs obligatorily index their subject and may optionally also index the primary object (1b), or an applied object (1c).<fnref n="2" /> Differential object marking is common.

(1) a. almaz mäkina fät'-ättf
Almaz.F car sell\PFV-SBJ.3SF
'Almaz sold a car.'

b. almaz mäkina-w-n fät'-ättf(-iw)
Almaz.F car-DEF.M/POSS.3SM sell\PFV-SBJ.3SF(-OBJ.3SM)
'Almaz sold the/his car.'

c. tilant mäkina-w-n fät'-ättf-ibb-ijŋ
yesterday car-DEF.M/POSS.3SM sell\PFV-SBJ.3SF(-MIL-OBJ.3SM)
'Yesterday, she sold the/his car to my detriment.'

<footnote n="2">² The Amharic data is transcribed and transliterated with IPA symbols, except for the open-mid central vowel, which is represented by ä.</footnote>
<figure><img src="image_21.png" /><figcaption>**Figure 2:** Geographical distribution of Ethiosemitic languages (taken from Meyer 2016a: 162).</figcaption></figure>

The position of adverbs and adverbials is flexible. Time adverbs usually occur sentence initially, as in (1c), but they can also follow an overt subject noun or immediately precede the verb. Furthermore, adverbs can be marked for definiteness and accusative case to emphasize them, as the second occurrence of *zare* ‘today’ in (2).<fnref n="3" />

<footnote n="3">³ The data quoted from *written* Amharic sources is given in the Amharic script (for which see Meyer 2016b) and in transliteration, whereas the data from oral sources are only presented in transcription.</footnote>
<figure><img src="image_21.png" /><figcaption>**Figure 2:** Geographical distribution of Ethiosemitic languages (taken from Meyer 2016a: 162).</figcaption></figure>

The position of adverbs and adverbials is flexible. Time adverbs usually occur sentence initially, as in (1c), but they can also follow an overt subject noun or immediately precede the verb. Furthermore, adverbs can be marked for definiteness and accusative case to emphasize them, as the second occurrence of *zare* ‘today’ in (2).<fnref n="3" />

<footnote n="3">³ The data quoted from *written* Amharic sources is given in the Amharic script (for which see Meyer 2016b) and in transliteration, whereas the data from oral sources are only presented in transcription.</footnote>
(2) Source: Twitter<fnref n="4" />

<table><tr><td>ሾክ</td><td>ያለውን</td><td>ዛፍ</td><td>ዛሬ</td><td>ተክላችሁ</td></tr><tr><td>fok</td><td>j-allä-w-n</td><td>zaf</td><td>zare</td><td>täklattfihw</td></tr><tr><td>thorn</td><td>REL-exist:NPST.SBJ.3SM-OBJ.3SM-ACC</td><td>tree</td><td>today</td><td>plant\CNV.2PL</td></tr><tr><td>ዛሬውን</td><td>ብትነከት</td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>zare-w-n</td><td>bi-tti-näku-t</td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>today-DEF.M-ACC</td><td>CND-SBJ.2PL-touch\PL-OBJ.3SM</td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>አይወጋችሁም።</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>a-j-wäga-attfihu-mm.</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>NEG-SBJ.3SM-pierce\IPFV-OBJ.2PL-NEG</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr></table>

'(If) you plant a tree with thorns [lit. a tree to which exist thorns] today and touch it the same day [lit. the today], it will not hurt [lit. pierce] you.'

Simple nouns can also become adverbs, but are then usually followed by a definite marker and the accusative suffix -n, as in the noun *ginbar* 'forehead' (15a).

As in other Semitic languages, verbs are formed through non-linear morphology by interdigitating a grammatical template with a lexical root. In other word classes (e.g. nouns, pronouns, interjections), fully vocalized stems predominate (for further details see, among others, Meyer 2011b; 2016c: 181–183; Edzard 2019; Mengistu 2023).

In verb inflection, Amharic has four primary conjugations, which are shown for the root √ s-b-r ‘break’ and the 3SM subject index in Table 1.

<table><caption>**Table 1:** Primary conjugations in Amharic.</caption><thead><tr><th>Conjugation</th><th>Template</th><th>Base</th><th>Index</th><th>Verb</th><th></th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>Perfective</td><td>C<sub>1</sub>äCC<sub>2</sub>äC<sub>3</sub></td><td>*säbbär</td><td>-ä</td><td>säbbärä</td><td>'he broke'</td></tr><tr><td>Imperfective</td><td>C<sub>1</sub>äC<sub>2</sub>C<sub>3</sub></td><td>*säbr</td><td>j-</td><td>jisäbir</td><td>'he breaks' (dependent)</td></tr><tr><td>Imperative</td><td>C<sub>1</sub>C<sub>2</sub>äC<sub>3</sub></td><td>*sbär</td><td>j-</td><td>jisbär</td><td>'he should break'</td></tr><tr><td>Converb</td><td>C<sub>1</sub>äC<sub>2</sub>C<sub>3</sub>ä</td><td>*säbrä</td><td>-u</td><td>säbro</td><td>'he breaking' (dependent)</td></tr></tbody></table>

The perfective and the imperfective encode two different viewpoint aspects, while the imperative is a mood expressing a command or request for the first, second and third persons. The fourth conjugation represents the converb (for details, see Meyer 2012).

<footnote n="4">⁴ https://twitter.com/natnaelmekonne7/status/1378704197667991557, 07/01/2024</footnote>
(2) Source: Twitter<fnref n="4" />

<table><tr><td>ሾክ</td><td>ያለውን</td><td>ዛፍ</td><td>ዛሬ</td><td>ተክላችሁ</td></tr><tr><td>fok</td><td>j-allä-w-n</td><td>zaf</td><td>zare</td><td>täklattfihʷ</td></tr><tr><td>thorn</td><td>REL-exist:NPST.SBJ.3SM-OBJ.3SM-ACC</td><td>tree</td><td>today</td><td>plant\CNV.2PL</td></tr><tr><td>ዛሬውን</td><td>ብትነከት</td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>zare-w-n</td><td>bi-tti-näku-t</td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>today-DEF.M-ACC</td><td>CND-SBJ.2PL-touch\PL-OBJ.3SM</td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>አይወጋችሁም።</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>a-j-wäga-attfihu-mm.</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>NEG-SBJ.3SM-pierce\IPFV-OBJ.2PL-NEG</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr></table>

'(If) you plant a tree with thorns [lit. a tree to which exist thorns] today and touch it the same day [lit. the today], it will not hurt [lit. pierce] you.'

Simple nouns can also become adverbs, but are then usually followed by a definite marker and the accusative suffix -n, as in the noun *ginbar* 'forehead' (15a).

As in other Semitic languages, verbs are formed through non-linear morphology by interdigitating a grammatical template with a lexical root. In other word classes (e.g. nouns, pronouns, interjections), fully vocalized stems predominate (for further details see, among others, Meyer 2011b; 2016c: 181–183; Edzard 2019; Mengistu 2023).

In verb inflection, Amharic has four primary conjugations, which are shown for the root ∨ s-b-r ‘break’ and the 3SM subject index in Table 1.

<table><caption>**Table 1:** Primary conjugations in Amharic.</caption><thead><tr><th>Conjugation</th><th>Template</th><th>Base</th><th>Index</th><th>Verb</th><th></th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>Perfective</td><td>C<sub>1</sub>äCC<sub>2</sub>äC<sub>3</sub></td><td>*säbbär</td><td>-ä</td><td>säbbärä</td><td>'he broke'</td></tr><tr><td>Imperfective</td><td>C<sub>1</sub>äC<sub>2</sub>C<sub>3</sub></td><td>*säbr</td><td>j-</td><td>jisäbir</td><td>'he breaks' (dependent)</td></tr><tr><td>Imperative</td><td>C<sub>1</sub>C<sub>2</sub>äC<sub>3</sub></td><td>*sbär</td><td>j-</td><td>jisbär</td><td>'he should break'</td></tr><tr><td>Converb</td><td>C<sub>1</sub>äC<sub>2</sub>C<sub>3</sub>ä</td><td>*säbrä</td><td>-u</td><td>säbro</td><td>'he breaking' (dependent)</td></tr></tbody></table>

The perfective and the imperfective encode two different viewpoint aspects, while the imperative is a mood expressing a command or request for the first, second and third persons. The fourth conjugation represents the converb (for details, see Meyer 2012).

<footnote n="4">⁴ https://twitter.com/natnaelmekonne7/status/1378704197667991557, 07/01/2024</footnote>
All four conjugations consist of a grammatical template and affixed person indexes that cross-reference the subject. The perfective and the converb index their subject with two different sets of suffixes, while the imperfective and the imperative use almost the same set consisting of prefixes and suffixes (see, e.g., Edzard 2019: 213). The pattern of the templates depends on the number of root consonants and the verb type (for further details, see Meyer 2011b: 1192–1193), i.e. the patterns in Table 1 are only valid for triliteral roots of Type A. Primary and applied objects can be indexed by a special suffix set, whereas the applied object index is preceded either by the malefactive/instrumental/locative (MIL) suffix -bb, as in (1c), or the benefactive suffix -ll. The imperfective verb is a dependent form which combines either with prefixes marking various types of subordinate clauses or with an auxiliary in affirmative main clauses. The converb, a verb form that cannot be negated, either marks a dependent clause or combines with a temporal auxiliary to form the perfect in main clauses. The most common auxiliaries are the cliticized existential verb = all(ä) for the nonpast and näbbär for the past. Negation is marked by the prefix a(l)- attached to the inflected verb and, in main clauses, additionally by the focus marker -mm, as in (2) (see Girma & Meyer 2008).

Amharic has a large number of ideophones (Goldenberg 2013: 223-224; Wetter 2003; 1999; Crass et al. 2001), but they have not received much attention in grammars. Amharic ideophones are morphologically invariant elements that usually occur only in combination with other morphemes. Most often, they are followed by the inflected verb ‘say’ with which they form a composite verb, such as the ideophone t’äbb ‘drop’ in (3).

(3) Source: Youtube<fnref n="5" />

አር ጠብ ይላል፣ ካፍሽ፡፡
mar t’äbb ji-l = all kaf-if
honey IDPH.drop 3SM-say\IPFV = AUX.NPST from.mouth-POSS.2SF
‘Honey drops from your mouth.’

Following Mengistu (2010), I consider the composite verbs like *t’äbb jilall* ‘it drops’ in (3) to be complex predicates which consist of an invariant element, called coverb, which provides the lexical semantics and which is followed by a light verb that hosts

<footnote n="5">⁵ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ror9ZyBFA5U, 17/12/2023</footnote>
All four conjugations consist of a grammatical template and affixed person indexes that cross-reference the subject. The perfective and the converb index their subject with two different sets of suffixes, while the imperfective and the imperative use almost the same set consisting of prefixes and suffixes (see, e.g., Edzard 2019: 213). The pattern of the templates depends on the number of root consonants and the verb type (for further details, see Meyer 2011b: 1192–1193), i.e. the patterns in Table 1 are only valid for triliteral roots of Type A. Primary and applied objects can be indexed by a special suffix set, whereas the applied object index is preceded either by the malefactive/instrumental/locative (MIL) suffix -bb, as in (1c), or the benefactive suffix -ll. The imperfective verb is a dependent form which combines either with prefixes marking various types of subordinate clauses or with an auxiliary in affirmative main clauses. The converb, a verb form that cannot be negated, either marks a dependent clause or combines with a temporal auxiliary to form the perfect in main clauses. The most common auxiliaries are the cliticized existential verb = all(ä) for the nonpast and näbbär for the past. Negation is marked by the prefix a(l)- attached to the inflected verb and, in main clauses, additionally by the focus marker -mm, as in (2) (see Girma & Meyer 2008).

Amharic has a large number of ideophones (Goldenberg 2013: 223-224; Wetter 2003; 1999; Crass et al. 2001), but they have not received much attention in grammars. Amharic ideophones are morphologically invariant elements that usually occur only in combination with other morphemes. Most often, they are followed by the inflected verb ‘say’ with which they form a composite verb, such as the ideophone t’äbb ‘drop’ in (3).

(3) Source: Youtube<fnref n="5" />

አር ጠብ ይላል፣ ካፍሽ፡፡
mar t’äbb ji-l = all kaf-if
honey IDPH.drop 3SM-say\IPFV = AUX.NPST from.mouth-POSS.2SF
‘Honey drops from your mouth.’

Following Mengistu (2010), I consider the composite verbs like *t’äbb jilall* ‘it drops’ in (3) to be complex predicates which consist of an invariant element, called coverb, which provides the lexical semantics and which is followed by a light verb that hosts

<footnote n="5">⁵ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ror9ZyBFA5U, 17/12/2023</footnote>
the grammatical information. In (3), the coverb is the ideophone *t’äbb*, but other elements may also function as coverbs in Amharic, as will be shown in Section 4. The light verb is the verb *alä* ‘say’<fnref n="6" /> in the imperfective aspect marked with a 3sm subject. In complex predicates, the light verb has lost most of its original lexical semantic content and become an element that primarily encodes grammatical functions. Besides *alä*, there are a number of other light verbs in Amharic (see Section 4). Additional examples of ideophones with the light verb *alä* ‘say’ and the semantic fields they cover are shown in (4), which is based on Wetter (2003: 261–262).

(4) Ideophones originating from imitative sound symbolism
(= onomatopoeia)

a. *t’ʷa* alä ‘pop, explode’

b. *k’ʷa* alä ‘snap, click’

c. *ʃiww* alä ‘whiz, swish, hiss’

Ideophones originating from synesthetic sound symbolism
(depicting perceptible sensory imagery)

d. *billitʃ* alä ‘flash, sparkle, glitter’

e. *bikk* alä ‘pop in, appear suddenly’

f. *zimm* alä ‘be quiet’

Ideophones originating from conventional sound symbolism
(depicting abstract concepts)

g. *zikk* alä ‘be low/inferior’

h. *k’äss* alä ‘be slow’

i. *däss* alä ‘be pleasing’

Apart from Wetter (2003), the existing literature on Amharic has generally taken the complex predicate with ‘say’, with all its different coverbs, as a point of departure for analysis (Section 2).

In this paper, I will argue that Amharic ideophones form a distinct word class in Amharic that can be defined on language-internal morphosyntactic grounds. After a brief overview of the history of research on Amharic composite verbs with ‘say’ and related constructions (Section 2), I will discuss criteria that can be used to define

<footnote n="6">⁶ As is common practice in the description of Semitic languages, the citation form of a verb is the 3sm perfective and not the infinitive/verbal noun.</footnote>
the grammatical information. In (3), the coverb is the ideophone *t'äbb*, but other elements may also function as coverbs in Amharic, as will be shown in Section 4. The light verb is the verb *alä* ‘say’<fnref n="6" /> in the imperfective aspect marked with a 3sm subject. In complex predicates, the light verb has lost most of its original lexical semantic content and become an element that primarily encodes grammatical functions. Besides *alä*, there are a number of other light verbs in Amharic (see Section 4). Additional examples of ideophones with the light verb *alä* ‘say’ and the semantic fields they cover are shown in (4), which is based on Wetter (2003: 261–262).

(4) Ideophones originating from imitative sound symbolism
(= onomatopoeia)

a. *t'ʷa* alä ‘pop, explode’

b. *k'ʷa* alä ‘snap, click’

c. *ʃiww* alä ‘whiz, swish, hiss’

Ideophones originating from synesthetic sound symbolism
(depicting perceptible sensory imagery)

d. *billitʃ* alä ‘flash, sparkle, glitter’

e. *bikk* alä ‘pop in, appear suddenly’

f. *zimm* alä ‘be quiet’

Ideophones originating from conventional sound symbolism
(depicting abstract concepts)

g. *zikk* alä ‘be low/inferior’

h. *k'äss* alä ‘be slow’

i. *däss* alä ‘be pleasing’

Apart from Wetter (2003), the existing literature on Amharic has generally taken the complex predicate with ‘say’, with all its different coverbs, as a point of departure for analysis (Section 2).

In this paper, I will argue that Amharic ideophones form a distinct word class in Amharic that can be defined on language-internal morphosyntactic grounds. After a brief overview of the history of research on Amharic composite verbs with ‘say’ and related constructions (Section 2), I will discuss criteria that can be used to define

<footnote n="6">⁶ As is common practice in the description of Semitic languages, the citation form of a verb is the 3sm perfective and not the infinitive/verbal noun.</footnote>
ideophones as a word class in Amharic, which are typically realized as coverbs in a
complex predicate (Section 3). Then I will discuss other coverbs that do not belong to
the class of ideophones (Section 4). In addition to basic or simple ideophones,
Amharic also has reduplicated ideophones and ideophones derived from a lexical root
by templates, which are described in Section 5 and Section 6, respectively. To provide
a broader picture of the distribution of complex predicates with the verb ‘say’ in
Ethiosemitic languages, a comparative overview is presented in Section 7. A summary
of the paper and the conclusions are given in Section 8.

The Amharic data in this paper comes from a convenience corpus consisting of
various printed sources, primarily Leslau's (1995) *Reference Grammar of Amharic*, my
own observations of spoken Amharic over the past twenty years and targeted online
searches. References have been provided for data cited from published sources and
the Internet; unreferenced data are from observation. All data has been cross-checked
with native speakers of Amharic (see Acknowledgements).

## 2. Research history

This section presents an overview of how complex predicates with ‘say’, which include
ideophones, have been addressed in descriptions of Amharic over time.

The first Amharic grammar, Ludolf (1698a: 32), mentions a complex predicate with
an ideophonic coverb, namely ን፲ ብእስት zimm bi?alähʷ [sic!] (today zimm al-kʷ
IDPH.silent say\PFV-1SG)<fnref n="7" /> ‘I am silent’, without further explanation. In later grammars,
the invariant coverb is usually treated as a particle or interjection combined with the
verb alä ‘say’, or with the verbs assäŋŋä ‘feel to do; sense; name’, täsäŋŋä ‘be named’
or adärrägä ‘do, make’ (e.g. Isenberg 1842: 148–149; Praetorius 1879: 275–276;
Armbruster 1908: 147).<fnref n="8" /> A summary of early descriptions of these complex predicates
can be found in Cohen (1939: 286–301). After an extensive list of examples, Cohen
concludes that the coverb in these complex predicates is typically a “descriptive
interjection” and proposes the term “composite descriptive verbs” to refer to them
(Cohen 1939: 287). In post-World War II Amharic grammars, constructions with the
verb ‘say’ have been called “composite verbs”, especially by Leslau (e.g. 1945a; 1995)
and Appleyard (2001), but also by terms like “compound verbs” (e.g. Hetzron 1972:

<footnote n="7">⁷ Note that the current form of the verb *alä* ‘say’ is historically related to the root b-h-l (see, e.g. Baye 1999) on which Ludolf’s expression is based.</footnote>

<footnote n="8">⁸ At least one Amharic grammar, Titov (1976), does not explicitly mention these constructions.</footnote>
ideophones as a word class in Amharic, which are typically realized as coverbs in a
complex predicate (Section 3). Then I will discuss other coverbs that do not belong to
the class of ideophones (Section 4). In addition to basic or simple ideophones,
Amharic also has reduplicated ideophones and ideophones derived from a lexical root
by templates, which are described in Section 5 and Section 6, respectively. To provide
a broader picture of the distribution of complex predicates with the verb ‘say’ in
Ethiosemitic languages, a comparative overview is presented in Section 7. A summary
of the paper and the conclusions are given in Section 8.

The Amharic data in this paper comes from a convenience corpus consisting of
various printed sources, primarily Leslau's (1995) *Reference Grammar of Amharic*, my
own observations of spoken Amharic over the past twenty years and targeted online
searches. References have been provided for data cited from published sources and
the Internet; unreferenced data are from observation. All data has been cross-checked
with native speakers of Amharic (see Acknowledgements).

## 2. Research history

This section presents an overview of how complex predicates with ‘say’, which include
ideophones, have been addressed in descriptions of Amharic over time.

The first Amharic grammar, Ludolf (1698a: 32), mentions a complex predicate with
an ideophonic coverb, namely ኗፃ ብአሉት zimm bi?alähʷ [sic!] (today zimm al-kʷ
IDPH.silent say\PFV-1SG)<fnref n="7" /> ‘I am silent’, without further explanation. In later grammars,
the invariant coverb is usually treated as a particle or interjection combined with the
verb alä ‘say’, or with the verbs assäŋŋä ‘feel to do; sense; name’, täsäŋŋä ‘be named’
or adärrägä ‘do, make’ (e.g. Isenberg 1842: 148–149; Praetorius 1879: 275–276;
Armbruster 1908: 147).<fnref n="8" /> A summary of early descriptions of these complex predicates
can be found in Cohen (1939: 286–301). After an extensive list of examples, Cohen
concludes that the coverb in these complex predicates is typically a “descriptive
interjection” and proposes the term “composite descriptive verbs” to refer to them
(Cohen 1939: 287). In post-World War II Amharic grammars, constructions with the
verb ‘say’ have been called “composite verbs”, especially by Leslau (e.g. 1945a; 1995)
and Appleyard (2001), but also by terms like “compound verbs” (e.g. Hetzron 1972:

<footnote n="7">⁷ Note that the current form of the verb *alä* ‘say’ is historically related to the root b-h-l (see, e.g. Baye 1999) on which Ludolf’s expression is based.</footnote>

<footnote n="8">⁸ At least one Amharic grammar, Titov (1976), does not explicitly mention these constructions.</footnote>
18; Baye 1999), which probably were then translated into Amharic as ጥምር ግሶች t'immir gissottf (lit. 'coalition verbs') (Baye 2008: 224–229), or “phrasal verbs” with the verb 'say' being a “supporting verb” (Meyer 2009: 27, see also Treis this volume for the Cushitic language Kambaata). Anbessa & Hudson (2007: 74–75) call these complex predicates “say verbs”.

Täklä Maryam (1964EC: 47), an early Amharic school grammar, considers the verb ‘say’ in complex predicates as an auxiliary that transforms nonverbal elements into verbs. This grammaticalization process is also assumed by Crass et al. (2001) and Wetter (1999). Mengistu (2010), whose terminology I have adopted in this paper, analyzes the verb *alä* ‘say’ and its causal counterpart *adärrägä* ‘do’ in complex predicates as “light verbs” and the preceding element as “coverb”. Note, however, that the term “coverb” is not limited to ideophones, but also includes other elements such as reported clauses, interjections, adverbials, simple nouns, reduplicated nouns and imperatives (see the examples in (14)).

The most comprehensive collection and detailed description of Amharic complex predicates with the verb *alä* ‘say’ and their coverbs can be found in Leslau (1995: 580–596). Baye (1999: 32–34) provides a semantic classification of all types of complex predicates with the verb ‘say’ in Amharic and thus implicitly also for ideophones. Based on the semantics and phonetic form of the coverb, he distinguishes between complex predicates for movement, silence, facial expressions, taste, rejection and onomatopoeic expressions.

Wetter (1999; and later 2002; 2003) was the first to use the term “ideophone” for the invariant coverb (i.e. non-reported element) in Amharic complex predicates with the verb ‘say’. In particular, Wetter (2003) elaborates on the concept of ideophone and identifies three types in Amharic, see (4), based on their degree of conventionalization by mapping their sound symbolic structure onto sensory imagery. Later, the term “ideophone” was also used in other work on Amharic, e.g. Zelealem (2011) and Meyer (2011b). The most recent publications on this topic are Teferi & Baye (2022a; 2022b), who present the preliminary results of an ongoing PhD study on Amharic ideophones and other elements occurring as coverb in constructions with the verb ‘say’ as well as various morphological and syntactic processes related to them.

In a broader context for Ethiopian languages in general, Appleyard (2001) proposes a form-oriented classification of complex predicates with the verb ‘say’ based on the morphological structure of the coverbs. He makes a very useful distinction between
18; Baye 1999), which probably were then translated into Amharic as ጥምር ግሶች t'immir gissottf (lit. 'coalition verbs') (Baye 2008: 224–229), or “phrasal verbs” with the verb 'say' being a “supporting verb” (Meyer 2009: 27, see also Treis this volume for the Cushitic language Kambaata). Anbessa & Hudson (2007: 74–75) call these complex predicates “say verbs”.

Täklä Maryam (1964EC: 47), an early Amharic school grammar, considers the verb 'say' in complex predicates as an auxiliary that transforms nonverbal elements into verbs. This grammaticalization process is also assumed by Crass et al. (2001) and Wetter (1999). Mengistu (2010), whose terminology I have adopted in this paper, analyzes the verb *alä* 'say' and its causal counterpart *adärrägä* 'do' in complex predicates as “light verbs” and the preceding element as “coverb”. Note, however, that the term “coverb” is not limited to ideophones, but also includes other elements such as reported clauses, interjections, adverbials, simple nouns, reduplicated nouns and imperatives (see the examples in (14)).

The most comprehensive collection and detailed description of Amharic complex predicates with the verb *alä* ‘say’ and their coverbs can be found in Leslau (1995: 580–596). Baye (1999: 32–34) provides a semantic classification of all types of complex predicates with the verb ‘say’ in Amharic and thus implicitly also for ideophones. Based on the semantics and phonetic form of the coverb, he distinguishes between complex predicates for movement, silence, facial expressions, taste, rejection and onomatopoeic expressions.

Wetter (1999; and later 2002; 2003) was the first to use the term “ideophone” for the invariant coverb (i.e. non-reported element) in Amharic complex predicates with the verb ‘say’. In particular, Wetter (2003) elaborates on the concept of ideophone and identifies three types in Amharic, see (4), based on their degree of conventionalization by mapping their sound symbolic structure onto sensory imagery. Later, the term “ideophone” was also used in other work on Amharic, e.g. Zelealem (2011) and Meyer (2011b). The most recent publications on this topic are Teferi & Baye (2022a; 2022b), who present the preliminary results of an ongoing PhD study on Amharic ideophones and other elements occurring as coverb in constructions with the verb ‘say’ as well as various morphological and syntactic processes related to them.

In a broader context for Ethiopian languages in general, Appleyard (2001) proposes a form-oriented classification of complex predicates with the verb ‘say’ based on the morphological structure of the coverbs. He makes a very useful distinction between
lexical non-derived ideophones, quoted particles (mainly nouns and interjections), and coverbs derived from an existing verb root.

However, all these studies simply assume that some elements in combination with the verb ‘say’ should be considered as ideophones without providing a clear definition of what an ideophone actually is in Amharic or in other Ethiosemitic languages.

### 3. On the definition of ideophones in Amharic

Dingemanse (2012: 655) defines ideophones semantically as “marked words that depict sensory imagery”, which he proposes as a comparative concept for linguistic typology (for an overview on research on ideophones, see Dingemanse 2018). Morphologically and morphosyntactically, ideophones are usually determined by language-specific criteria, since common features that could universally define them have not yet been found (Voeltz & Kilian-Hatz 2001: 2; Kilian-Hatz 2020: 696). However, ideophones share a number of common tendencies (see Kilian-Hatz 2020 for details): They are usually sound-symbolic content-words with a language-specific semantics; they may exhibit phonological features not found in other word classes of the respective language; they are morphologically invariant and syntactically free; and they are preferably found in quotative constructions and used in informal speech situations.

In the following, it will be shown how these general phonological, morphological, morphosyntactic and semantic criteria apply to Amharic ideophones. The text extract in (5) illustrates the use of complex predicates with an ideophone as coverb in colloquial speech; the ideophones and their light verbs are given in bold.

#### (5) Source<fnref n="9" />

[Context: Several guests sit in a cafe bar drinking coffee and reading newspapers. Suddenly one of the guests jumps up frantically and starts searching for his cell phone. As he cannot find it, he accuses the waiter and other guests of theft. Eventually, the waiter asks him to pay the bill...]

<footnote n="9">⁹ https://www.sewasew.com/p/ፈሰን, 17/01/2022</footnote>
lexical non-derived ideophones, quoted particles (mainly nouns and interjections), and coverbs derived from an existing verb root.

However, all these studies simply assume that some elements in combination with the verb ‘say’ should be considered as ideophones without providing a clear definition of what an ideophone actually is in Amharic or in other Ethiosemitic languages.

### 3. On the definition of ideophones in Amharic

Dingemanse (2012: 655) defines ideophones semantically as “marked words that depict sensory imagery”, which he proposes as a comparative concept for linguistic typology (for an overview on research on ideophones, see Dingemanse 2018). Morphologically and morphosyntactically, ideophones are usually determined by language-specific criteria, since common features that could universally define them have not yet been found (Voeltz & Kilian-Hatz 2001: 2; Kilian-Hatz 2020: 696). However, ideophones share a number of common tendencies (see Kilian-Hatz 2020 for details): They are usually sound-symbolic content-words with a language-specific semantics; they may exhibit phonological features not found in other word classes of the respective language; they are morphologically invariant and syntactically free; and they are preferably found in quotative constructions and used in informal speech situations.

In the following, it will be shown how these general phonological, morphological, morphosyntactic and semantic criteria apply to Amharic ideophones. The text extract in (5) illustrates the use of complex predicates with an ideophone as coverb in colloquial speech; the ideophones and their light verbs are given in bold.

#### (5) Source<fnref n="9" />

[Context: Several guests sit in a cafe bar drinking coffee and reading newspapers. Suddenly one of the guests jumps up frantically and starts searching for his cell phone. As he cannot find it, he accuses the waiter and other guests of theft. Eventually, the waiter asks him to pay the bill...]

<footnote n="9">⁹ https://www.sewasew.com/p/ፈሰን, 17/01/2022</footnote>
a. [...] የሂሳብ ደረሰኝ የመጣበትን ትንሽዬ
jä-hisab däräsäŋŋ jä-mätt’a-bb-ät-in tinniʃ-ijje
LNK-bill receipt LNK-come\PFV.SBJ.3SM-MIL-OBJ.3SM-ACC small-DIM
አቃፊ ነገር ብድግ ሲያደርገው —
ak’afi nägär biddigg s-j-adärg-äw
holding thing IDPH.rise_suddenly when-SBJ.3SM-do\IPFV-OBJ.3SM
‘When he suddenly took up the rather small folder in which the bill came –’

b. ከው!! እፍር!! ሽምቅቅ!!
kiww iffirr fïmk’ïkk’
IDPH.very_scared IDPH.very_ashamed IDPH.be_folded_up
እንደው መግቢያ ጥፍት!!
indäw mägbija t’iffitt
even entrance IDPH absence

‘He got frightened! He got ashamed! He pulled (his arms) over (his chest)! He did not know where to disappear!’

c. «ምድር ዋጪኝ፣ ሰማይ ተከደንብኝ»
midir watʃ’i-ŋŋ sämaj täkädän-ibbi-ŋŋ
earth swallow\IMP.SBJ.2SF-OBJ.1SG heaven cover_up\IMP.SBJ.2SM-MIL-OBJ.1SG
እይነት ነገር፤
ajnät nägär
kind thing

‘(He was thinking) Something like “(Oh) earth swallow me, (oh) heaven cover me up” –’

d. ሞባይሉ ዱብ አላለም!!
mobajl-u dubb al-al-ä-mm’
cell_phone-POSS.3SM IDPH.appear_suddenly NEG-say\PFV-3SM-NEG
‘(and then was it not that) his cell phone suddenly appeared (in front of him).’

The typical use of ideophones is illustrated in (5a) and (5d), where *biddigg* ‘rise suddenly’<fnref n="10" /> and *dubb* ‘appear suddenly’ form a complex predicate with the verbs *alä*

<footnote n="10">¹⁰ The word-middle consonant of some ideophones is optionally geminated or single, e.g. *biddigg* (Leslau 1995: 585) vs. *bidigg* (Kane 1990: 938) ‘rise suddenly’ (see also Cohen 1939: 288).</footnote>
a. [...] የሂሳብ ደረሰኝ የመጣበትን ትንሽዬ
jä-hisab däräsäŋŋ jä-mätt’a-bb-ät-in tinniʃ-ijje
LNK-bill receipt LNK-come\PFV.SBJ.3SM-MIL-OBJ.3SM-ACC small-DIM
አቃፊ ነገር ብድግ ሲያደርገው —
ak’afi nägär biddigg s-j-adärg-äw
holding thing IDPH.rise_suddenly when-SBJ.3SM-do\IPFV-OBJ.3SM
‘When he suddenly took up the rather small folder in which the bill came –’

b. ከው!! እፍር!! ሽምቅቅ!!
kiww iffirr fïmk’ïkk’
IDPH.very_scared IDPH.very_ashamed IDPH.be_folded_up
እንደው መግቢያ ጥፍት!!
indäw mägbija t’iffitt
even entrance IDPH absence

‘He got frightened! He got ashamed! He pulled (his arms) over (his chest)! He did not know where to disappear!’

c. «ምድር ዋጪኝ፣ ሰማይ ተከደንብኝ»
midir watʃ’i-ŋŋ sämaj täkädän-ibbi-ŋŋ
earth swallow\IMP.SBJ.2SF-OBJ.1SG heaven cover_up\IMP.SBJ.2SM-MIL-OBJ.1SG
እይነት ነገር፤
ajnät nägär
kind thing

‘(He was thinking) Something like “(Oh) earth swallow me, (oh) heaven cover me up” –’

d. ሞባይሉ ዱብ አላለም!!
mobajl-u dubb al-al-ä-mm’
cell_phone-POSS.3SM IDPH.appear_suddenly NEG-say\PFV-3SM-NEG
‘(and then was it not that) his cell phone suddenly appeared (in front of him).’

The typical use of ideophones is illustrated in (5a) and (5d), where *biddigg* ‘rise suddenly’<fnref n="10" /> and *dubb* ‘appear suddenly’ form a complex predicate with the verbs *alä*

<footnote n="10">¹⁰ The word-middle consonant of some ideophones is optionally geminated or single, e.g. *biddigg* (Leslau 1995: 585) vs. *bidigg* (Kane 1990: 938) ‘rise suddenly’ (see also Cohen 1939: 288).</footnote>
‘say’ and *adärrägä* ‘do’ as light verbs (see Section 4 below). The independent use of ideophones without a light verb is rare, but may occur in emphasized discourse (5b), in child-oriented speech, as in the extract from a children’s song in (6) and the riddle in (7), or in second-person imperatives (see e.g. Mengistu 2010: 299 fn. 4).

(6) Source: Youtube<fnref n="11" />

a. *wiha-ye-n* t’it”t’itt~t’it”t’itt.

water-POSS.1SG-ACC IDPH.drink~PLR

‘(I) drink up my (glass of) water.’

b. *k’urs-e-n-imm* bil’itt~bil’itt.

breakfast-POSS.1SG-ACC-FOC IDPH.eat~PLR

‘And (I) also eat up my breakfast.’

(7) *lidg-itwa* bíkk* t’il’ikk*;

child-DEF.F IDPH.pop IDPH.plunge

inat-jä-wa k’oma dir’rikk’.

mother-SNG-DEF/POSS.3SF stand\CNV.3SF IDPH.dry/insist

‘The child is [steadily] appearing and disappearing; her mother insists on standing still.’ [answer: pestle and mortar]

Although Amharic prosody is not yet well-studied, it is generally assumed that the last syllable of a polysyllabic word is not accented (Alemayehu 1987: 24, 29–31, 37; and also Leslau 1995: 44–45). For polysyllabic ideophones, on the other hand, it seems that the final syllable typically bears the accent, as shown by the symbol ‘ in (6) and (7). This observation still needs to be verified by further studies.<fnref n="12" />

With regard to their segmental phonemic structure and phonotactics, the majority of ideophones do not differ from other Amharic words. Only two ideophones—*nijijn alä* ‘buzz, hum’ and *naw alä* ‘meow’<fnref n="13" /> (Kane 1990: 1089)—begin with the palatal nasal, which usually does not occur word-initially in Amharic. The final consonant of an ideophone tends to be geminated. Word-final gemination, however, is not a

<footnote n="11">¹¹ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BWyUIR0rpVY, 17/01/2022</footnote>

<footnote n="12">¹² Ideophones in the Bantu language Sena (seh) are also characterized by a different prosodic behavior vis-à-vis other word classes (see Guérois this volume).</footnote>

<footnote n="13">¹³ Or also *mijaw alä* (Kane 1990: 319) with a different initial nasal.</footnote>
‘say’ and *adärrägä* ‘do’ as light verbs (see Section 4 below). The independent use of ideophones without a light verb is rare, but may occur in emphasized discourse (5b), in child-oriented speech, as in the extract from a children’s song in (6) and the riddle in (7), or in second-person imperatives (see e.g. Mengistu 2010: 299 fn. 4).

(6) Source: Youtube<fnref n="11" />

a. wiha-ye-n t’it”t’itt~t’it”t’itt.

water-POSS.1SG-ACC IDPH.drink~PLR

‘(I) drink up my (glass of) water.’

b. k’urs-e-n-imm bil’litt~bil’litt.

breakfast-POSS.1SG-ACC-FOC IDPH.eat~PLR

‘And (I) also eat up my breakfast.’

(7) liġ-itwa bíkk’ t’il’ikk’;

child-DEF.F IDPH.pop IDPH.plunge

inat-jä-wa k’oma dir’rikk’.

mother-SNG-DEF/POSS.3SF stand\CNV.3SF IDPH.dry/insist

‘The child is [steadily] appearing and disappearing; her mother insists on standing still.’ [answer: pestle and mortar]

Although Amharic prosody is not yet well-studied, it is generally assumed that the last syllable of a polysyllabic word is not accented (Alemayehu 1987: 24, 29–31, 37; and also Leslau 1995: 44–45). For polysyllabic ideophones, on the other hand, it seems that the final syllable typically bears the accent, as shown by the symbol ‘ in (6) and (7). This observation still needs to be verified by further studies.<fnref n="12" />

With regard to their segmental phonemic structure and phonotactics, the majority of ideophones do not differ from other Amharic words. Only two ideophones—*nijijn alä* ‘buzz, hum’ and *naw alä* ‘meow’<fnref n="13" /> (Kane 1990: 1089)—begin with the palatal nasal, which usually does not occur word-initially in Amharic. The final consonant of an ideophone tends to be geminated. Word-final gemination, however, is not a

<footnote n="11">¹¹ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BWyUIR0rpVY, 17/01/2022</footnote>

<footnote n="12">¹² Ideophones in the Bantu language Sena (seh) are also characterized by a different prosodic behavior vis-à-vis other word classes (see Guérois this volume).</footnote>

<footnote n="13">¹³ Or also *mijaw alä* (Kane 1990: 319) with a different initial nasal.</footnote>
phonotactic peculiarity of ideophones and is also found with nouns (8) and verbs (9), as well as other word classes, e.g. the interjections *ettf* 'ugh (expression of disgust)' and *goff* 'bravo' (Leslau 1995: 907, 909), and bound morphemes such as the -j̥n POSS.1SG, -ättf 3SF subject index on perfective verbs.

(8) Leslau (1995: 12–13)

a. nättf* 'white'

vs. nätf* 'one who plucks'

b. giff 'stripped'

vs. gif 'wrong, injustice'

c. wätt 'solid, homogenous'

vs. wät 'stew'

(9) a. t'iru-nna mät'fo säw-ottʃ-in läjj!

good-and bad person-PL-ACC separate\IMP.2SM
‘Distinguish between good and bad people!’

b. wiha-w

jï-fäss

näbbär.

water-DEF.M

3SM-spill\IPFV

AUX.PST

‘The water was spilling over.’

It is instead a few interjections, not ideophones, that contain unusual sounds, as the paralinguistic clicks in (10), or the interjection ärä ‘really! (expressing surprise)’, the only word starting with the vowel ä.

(10) **Interjections with para-linguistic click consonants**

a. Labial click

(m)⊙w

(imitating a kissing sound)

b. Alveolar click

!!!

(showing regret)

c. Lateral click

||||

(driving horses)

d. Uvular click

¢¢¢

(calling chicken)

The interjections with the click consonants in (10) are usually not mentioned in Amharic grammars and dictionaries (e.g. Leslau 1995: 899–909), probably because they are exclusively found in spoken language, and the Ethiopian script does not have graphemes to write them.

Although many ideophones in Amharic seem to be of onomatopoetic origin or to represent some kind of sound symbolism, e.g. t'äbb 'drip', tf'ill~tf'ill 'tinkle', koff~koff
phonotactic peculiarity of ideophones and is also found with nouns (8) and verbs (9), as well as other word classes, e.g. the interjections *ettf* 'ugh (expression of disgust)' and *goff* 'bravo' (Leslau 1995: 907, 909), and bound morphemes such as the -jnn POSS.1SG, -ättf 3SF subject index on perfective verbs.

(8) Leslau (1995: 12–13)

a. nättf* 'white'

vs. nätf* 'one who plucks'

b. giff 'stripped'

vs. gif 'wrong, injustice'

c. wätt 'solid, homogenous'

vs. wät 'stew'

(9) a. t'iru-nna mät'fo säw-ottʃ-in läjj!

good-and bad person-PL-ACC separate\IMP.2SM
‘Distinguish between good and bad people!’

b. wiha-w

jï-fäss

näbbär.

water-DEF.M

3SM-spill\IPFV

AUX.PST

‘The water was spilling over.’

It is instead a few interjections, not ideophones, that contain unusual sounds, as the paralinguistic clicks in (10), or the interjection ärä ‘really! (expressing surprise)’, the only word starting with the vowel ä.

(10) **Interjections with para-linguistic click consonants**

a. Labial click

(m)⊙w

(imitating a kissing sound)

b. Alveolar click

!!!

(showing regret)

c. Lateral click

||||

(driving horses)

d. Uvular click

¢¢¢

(calling chicken)

The interjections with the click consonants in (10) are usually not mentioned in Amharic grammars and dictionaries (e.g. Leslau 1995: 899–909), probably because they are exclusively found in spoken language, and the Ethiopian script does not have graphemes to write them.

Although many ideophones in Amharic seem to be of onomatopoetic origin or to represent some kind of sound symbolism, e.g. *t'äbb* ‘drip’, *tf'ill~tf'ill* ‘tinkle’, *koff~koff*
‘rustle’ (Zelealem 2011: 3, 28, 31),<fnref n="14" /> Amharic also has a number of regular nouns and verbs with an onomatopoeic sound pattern, as in (11).

(11) Onomatopoeia

<table><thead><tr><th>Noun</th><th>Verb</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>a. Kane (1990: 1771, 1772)<br><i>dok'dokk'e</i> 'motorbike'</td><td><i>tändäk'äddäk'ä</i> 'make a putt-putting sound'</td></tr><tr><td>b. Kane (1990: 2241)<br><i>tʃ'atʃ'ut</i> 'chick'</td><td><i>täntʃ'atʃ'a</i> 'twitter'</td></tr><tr><td>c. Kane (1990: 1448)<br><i>kukkulu</i> (cock's crow)</td><td><i>kokkolä</i> 'crow'</td></tr></tbody></table>

Consequently, an onomatopoeic sound pattern is not an appropriate criterion for defining an ideophone. Similarly, reduplication, which is often found in ideophones to express some kind of distributive meaning (see Section 5), also occurs in interjections, nouns, verbs, adverbs, etc.

Many ideophones can be nominalized by the suffix -ta, e.g. *billittʃ* (ideophone for flash, sparkle, glitter) > *billittʃ-ita* ‘flicker (n), glimmer (n)’, *zikk*’ (ideophone for being low) > *zikk’-ita* ‘lowness’, *zimm* (ideophone for being quiet) > *zimm-ita* ‘silence’. However, as the nominalization does not apply to all ideophones and also occurs with interjections, e.g. *imbi-ta* ‘refusal’ (< *imbi* ‘no emphatic’)!), *inde-ta* ‘certainly, of course’ (< *inde* ‘what!, how!’ expressing surprise), it cannot be considered a defining feature of the word class of ideophones.

Ideophones without a light verb appear obligatorily in the clause-final verbal slot, e.g. (6), or immediately preceding the light verb in complex predicates, as in (5a) and (5d). Their syntactic position is not flexible. Although ideophones without a light verb lack morphological person and TAM markers, they govern objects marked for the accusative case by the suffix -n (6) and can be modified by a converb (7). Thus, Amharic ideophones share syntactic features with verbs, not with nouns.

To recapitulate the main points: The ideophones formed by sound-symbolic imitation, e.g. (4a), are onomatopoeia, but not all onomatopoeia are ideophones. There is no phonetic or phonological feature that clearly separates them from

<footnote n="14">¹⁴ Zelealem (2011) has a very broad concept of onomatopoeia. For example, he associates smallness with the vowel i and bigness with all non-front vowels, e.g. *t'ik'it* ‘little (few)’ vs. *bizu* ‘many’ (Zelealem 2011: 5), or the meaning of ‘sucking’ and ‘absorbing’ with the syllables *t'V* and *mVt*, as in *t'äbba* ‘suck’ or *mätt'ät'ä* ‘suck up, absorb’ (Zelealem 2011: 11).</footnote>
‘rustle’ (Zelealem 2011: 3, 28, 31),<fnref n="14" /> Amharic also has a number of regular nouns and verbs with an onomatopoeic sound pattern, as in (11).

(11) Onomatopoeia

<table><thead><tr><th>Noun</th><th>Verb</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>a. Kane (1990: 1771, 1772)</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>dok'dokk'e 'motorbike'</td><td>tändäk'äddäk'ä 'make a putt-putting sound'</td></tr><tr><td>b. Kane (1990: 2241)</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>tʃ'atʃ'ut 'chick'</td><td>täntʃ'atʃ'a 'twitter'</td></tr><tr><td>c. Kane (1990: 1448)</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>kukkulu (cock's crow)</td><td>kokkolä 'crow'</td></tr></tbody></table>

Consequently, an onomatopoeic sound pattern is not an appropriate criterion for defining an ideophone. Similarly, reduplication, which is often found in ideophones to express some kind of distributive meaning (see Section 5), also occurs in interjections, nouns, verbs, adverbs, etc.

Many ideophones can be nominalized by the suffix -ta, e.g. *billittʃ* (ideophone for flash, sparkle, glitter) > *billittʃ-ita* ‘flicker (n), glimmer (n)’, *zikk*’ (ideophone for being low) > *zikk’-ita* ‘lowness’, *zimm* (ideophone for being quiet) > *zimm-ita* ‘silence’. However, as the nominalization does not apply to all ideophones and also occurs with interjections, e.g. *imbi-ta* ‘refusal’ (< *imbi* ‘no emphatic’)!), *inde-ta* ‘certainly, of course’ (< *inde* ‘what!, how!’ expressing surprise), it cannot be considered a defining feature of the word class of ideophones.

Ideophones without a light verb appear obligatorily in the clause-final verbal slot, e.g. (6), or immediately preceding the light verb in complex predicates, as in (5a) and (5d). Their syntactic position is not flexible. Although ideophones without a light verb lack morphological person and TAM markers, they govern objects marked for the accusative case by the suffix -n (6) and can be modified by a converb (7). Thus, Amharic ideophones share syntactic features with verbs, not with nouns.

To recapitulate the main points: The ideophones formed by sound-symbolic imitation, e.g. (4a), are onomatopoeia, but not all onomatopoeia are ideophones. There is no phonetic or phonological feature that clearly separates them from

<footnote n="14">¹⁴ Zelealem (2011) has a very broad concept of onomatopoeia. For example, he associates smallness with the vowel i and bigness with all non-front vowels, e.g. *t’ik’it* ‘little (few)’ vs. *bizu* ‘many’ (Zelealem 2011: 5), or the meaning of ‘sucking’ and ‘absorbing’ with the syllables *t’V* and *mVt*, as in *t’äbba* ‘suck’ or *mätt’ät’ä* ‘suck up, absorb’ (Zelealem 2011: 11).</footnote>
members of other word classes – apart maybe from an unusual word-final accent, which, however, needs further investigation. Ideophones share their obligatory clause-final position and their ability to govern direct objects with verbs, and their morphologically simple and invariant form with interjections. Moreover, interjections also occur in constructions with the verb ‘say’ (12a). In some of these constructions, the verb ‘say’ has grammaticalized into a light verb resulting in a complex predicate with a more abstract meaning, as in (12b), where the verb *alä* is no longer used to mark a direct quotation, but has become a light verb hosting grammatical information (see especially Wetter 2002).

(12) Wetter (2002: 1833)

a. kasa « imbi » al-ä.
Kasa.M INTJ.no say\PFV]
‘Kasa said, “no”.’

b. rädijo imbi al-ä.
radio INTJ.no say\PFV-3SM
‘The radio doesn’t work (lit. said “no”).’

In fact, most previous studies have treated all complex predicates based on the verb ‘say’ together, regardless of whether their coverb is an ideophone (4), an interjection (12) or some other element (see example (14) in Section 4). However, in these complex predicates, only ideophones, but not interjections or other elements as coverb, productively occur in noncausal/causal pairs with the light verbs ‘say’ and *adärrägä* ‘do’, respectively, as shown in (13). See also Cohen et al. (2002: 245).

(13) **Complex predicates with an ideophone as coverb**

<table><thead><tr><th></th><th>Noncausal</th><th>Causal</th><th></th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>a.</td><td>t'ʷa alä</td><td>'pop, explode'</td><td>'cause to pop'</td></tr><tr><td>b.</td><td>billittf' alä</td><td>'flash, glitter'</td><td>'cause to glitter, enlighten'</td></tr><tr><td>c.</td><td>zikk' alä</td><td>'be low/inferior'</td><td>'demote, degrade'</td></tr></tbody></table>

‘say’ constructions with an interjection as coverb

<table><thead><tr><th></th><th>Noncausal</th><th>Causal</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>d.</td><td>imbi alä</td><td>*imbi adärrägä</td></tr><tr><td>e.</td><td>mijaw alä</td><td>*mijaw adärrägä</td></tr><tr><td>f.</td><td>ŋiŋŋ alä</td><td>*ŋiŋŋ adärrägä</td></tr></tbody></table>
members of other word classes – apart maybe from an unusual word-final accent, which, however, needs further investigation. Ideophones share their obligatory clause-final position and their ability to govern direct objects with verbs, and their morphologically simple and invariant form with interjections. Moreover, interjections also occur in constructions with the verb ‘say’ (12a). In some of these constructions, the verb ‘say’ has grammaticalized into a light verb resulting in a complex predicate with a more abstract meaning, as in (12b), where the verb *alä* is no longer used to mark a direct quotation, but has become a light verb hosting grammatical information (see especially Wetter 2002).

(12) Wetter (2002: 1833)

a. kasa « imbi » al-ä.
Kasa.M INTJ.no say\PFV]
‘Kasa said, “no”.’

b. rädijo imbi al-ä.
radio INTJ.no say\PFV-3SM
‘The radio doesn’t work (lit. said “no”).’

In fact, most previous studies have treated all complex predicates based on the verb ‘say’ together, regardless of whether their coverb is an ideophone (4), an interjection (12) or some other element (see example (14) in Section 4). However, in these complex predicates, only ideophones, but not interjections or other elements as coverb, productively occur in noncausal/causal pairs with the light verbs ‘say’ and *adärrägä* ‘do’, respectively, as shown in (13). See also Cohen et al. (2002: 245).

(13) **Complex predicates with an ideophone as coverb**

<table><thead><tr><th></th><th>Noncausal</th><th>Causal</th><th></th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>a.</td><td>t'ʷa alä</td><td>'pop, explode'</td><td>'cause to pop'</td></tr><tr><td>b.</td><td>billittf' alä</td><td>'flash, glitter'</td><td>'cause to glitter, enlighten'</td></tr><tr><td>c.</td><td>zikk' alä</td><td>'be low/inferior'</td><td>'demote, degrade'</td></tr></tbody></table>

‘say’ constructions with an interjection as coverb

<table><thead><tr><th></th><th>Noncausal</th><th>Causal</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>d.</td><td>imbi alä</td><td>*imbi adärrägä</td></tr><tr><td>e.</td><td>mijaw alä</td><td>*mijaw adärrägä</td></tr><tr><td>f.</td><td>ŋiŋŋ alä</td><td>*ŋiŋŋ adärrägä</td></tr></tbody></table>
In contrast to ideophones, interjections and other elements as coverb in (13) only cooccur with the verb ‘say’. While ideophones clearly differ from verbs and nouns in that they are morphologically invariant, the distinction between interjections and ideophones is akin to a grey zone in which the boundary between the two word-classes is not easily drawn, as in (12).

Based on these two features—typical occurrence as coverb and manifestation in a paired construction with the light verbs *alä* ‘say’ (noncausal) and *adärrägä* ‘do’ (causal)—ideophones can be considered a separate word class in Amharic. This word class differs from other Amharic word classes in that its members do not usually appear alone, but typically in combination with a light verb.

### 4. The verb ‘say’ in combination with various coverbs

Constructions consisting of a coverb and the verb *alä* ‘say’ are very common in Amharic. The coverb can be made up of various elements: a quotation (14), a pseudo-quotation (14b), an ideophone (14c–d), a noun (14e–g),<fnref n="15" /> a reduplicated imperative verb (14h)<fnref n="16" /> and probably other elements (see also Goldenberg 2013):

(14) a. « nägä **addis abäbä** **i-hed**=**allä-hʷ** »

tomorrow Addis_Ababa 1SG-go\IPFV = AUX.NPST-1SG

al-ä-jn.

say\PFV-SBJ.3SM-OBJ.1SG

‘He said to me, “I will go to Addis Ababa tomorrow.”’

b. **bär-u** « **ali-kkäffät** » **al-ä-jn.**

door-DEF.M NEG-1SG.be_open\IPFV say\PFV-SBJ.3SM-OBJ.1SG

‘I could not open the door (lit. the door said to me, “I won’t open”).’

c. **bär-u** **gʷa** **blo** **täzägga.**

door-DEF.M IDPH.crash say\CNV.3SM be_closed\PFV.3SM

‘The door slammed shut.’

<footnote n="15">¹⁵ For fully reduplicated nouns as coverb, see Section 6.</footnote>

<footnote n="16">¹⁶ Coverbs consisting of reduplicated imperative verbs occur invariably with a 2sm subject and typically describe an imagined action. This construction is only very rudimentarily described for Amharic and not found in the grammars of other Ethiosemitic languages.</footnote>
In contrast to ideophones, interjections and other elements as coverb in (13) only cooccur with the verb ‘say’. While ideophones clearly differ from verbs and nouns in that they are morphologically invariant, the distinction between interjections and ideophones is akin to a grey zone in which the boundary between the two word-classes is not easily drawn, as in (12).

Based on these two features—typical occurrence as coverb and manifestation in a paired construction with the light verbs *alä* ‘say’ (noncausal) and *adärrägä* ‘do’ (causal)—ideophones can be considered a separate word class in Amharic. This word class differs from other Amharic word classes in that its members do not usually appear alone, but typically in combination with a light verb.

### 4. The verb ‘say’ in combination with various coverbs

Constructions consisting of a coverb and the verb *alä* ‘say’ are very common in Amharic. The coverb can be made up of various elements: a quotation (14), a pseudo-quotation (14b), an ideophone (14c–d), a noun (14e–g),<fnref n="15" /> a reduplicated imperative verb (14h)<fnref n="16" /> and probably other elements (see also Goldenberg 2013):

(14) a. « nägä **addis abäbä** **i-hed**=**allä-hʷ** »

tomorrow Addis_Ababa 1SG-go\IPFV = AUX.NPST-1SG

al-ä-ŋŋ.

say\PFV-SBJ.3SM-OBJ.1SG

‘He said to me, “I will go to Addis Ababa tomorrow.”’

b. **bär-u** « **ali-kkäffät** » **al-ä-ŋŋ.**

door-DEF.M NEG-1SG.be_open\IPFV say\PFV-SBJ.3SM-OBJ.1SG

‘I could not open the door (lit. the door said to me, “I won’t open”).’

c. **bär-u** **gʷa** **blo** **täzägga.**

door-DEF.M IDPH.crash say\CNV.3SM be_closed\PFV.3SM

‘The door slammed shut.’

<footnote n="15">¹⁵ For fully reduplicated nouns as coverb, see Section 6.</footnote>

<footnote n="16">¹⁶ Coverbs consisting of reduplicated imperative verbs occur invariably with a 2sm subject and typically describe an imagined action. This construction is only very rudimentarily described for Amharic and not found in the grammars of other Ethiosemitic languages.</footnote>
d. mämt'at-u-(-n) bät'am däss
come.VN-POSS.3SM-ACC very IDPH.happy

blo-jn = all.

say\CNV.SBJ.3SM-OBJ.1SG = AUX.NPST

‘His coming made me very happy.’

e. Baye (1999: 35)

libb blä-h tämälkät-äw!

heart say\CNV-2SM observe\IMP.SBJ.2SM-OBJ.3SM

‘Watch him/it carefully (lit. watch him/it saying, “Heart”)!’

f. k-ajjä-hw-at wädih fik'ir~fik'ir
ABL-see\PFV-SBJ.1SG-OBJ.3SF since love

al-ä-jn.

say\PFV-SBJ.3SM-OBJ.1SG

‘Since I have seen her, I feel like being in love (lit. ..., [it] says to me, “love, love”).’

g. wät'-wa wiha~wiha ji-l = all.
stew-POSS.3SF water 3SM-say\IPFV = AUX.NPST

‘Her stew tastes like water (lit. Her stew says, “water, water”).’

h. adapted from Baye (1999: 37)

s-aj-at inäk'-at~inäk'-at

while-SBJ.1SG.see\IPFV-OBJ.3SF strangle\IMP.SBJ.2SM-OBJ.3SF

al-ä-jn

say\PFV-SBJ.3SM-OBJ.1SG

‘When I see her, I very much feel like strangling her (lit. ..., [it] says to me, “Strangle her, Strangle her!”).’

The expression *libb alä* ‘pay attention’ in (14e) is probably one of the many collocations with the noun *libb* ‘heart’ (see Kane 1990: 71–76) which eventually became a lexicalized idiomatic expression. Most typically the nouns acting as coverbs are repeated, as in (14f–g). All the coverbs in (14) have in common that no other free lexical element can intervene between the coverb and the light verb, see (21b) and (22b), and that the coverbs cannot be modified syntactically, e.g. by determiners or case markers, such as *wiha-w~wiha-w al-ä* (water-DEF.M~water-DEF.M say\PFV-3SM)
d. mämt'at-u-(-n) bät'am däss
come.VN-POSS.3SM-ACC very IDPH.happy

blo-jn = all.

say\CNV.SBJ.3SM-OBJ.1SG = AUX.NPST

‘His coming made me very happy.’

e. Baye (1999: 35)

libb blä-h tämälkät-äw!

heart say\CNV-2SM observe\IMP.SBJ.2SM-OBJ.3SM

‘Watch him/it carefully (lit. watch him/it saying, “Heart”)!’

f. k-ajjä-hw-at wädih fik'ir~fik'ir
ABL-see\PFV-SBJ.1SG-OBJ.3SF since love

al-ä-jn.

say\PFV-SBJ.3SM-OBJ.1SG

‘Since I have seen her, I feel like being in love (lit. ..., [it] says to me, “love, love”).’

g. wät'-wa wiha~wiha ji-l = all.
stew-POSS.3SF water 3SM-say\IPFV = AUX.NPST

‘Her stew tastes like water (lit. Her stew says, “water, water”).’

h. adapted from Baye (1999: 37)

s-aj-at inäk'-at~inäk'-at

while-SBJ.1SG.see\IPFV-OBJ.3SF strangle\IMP.SBJ.2SM-OBJ.3SF

al-ä-jn

say\PFV-SBJ.3SM-OBJ.1SG

‘When I see her, I very much feel like strangling her (lit. ..., [it] says to me, “Strangle her, Strangle her!”).’

The expression *libb alä* ‘pay attention’ in (14e) is probably one of the many collocations with the noun *libb* ‘heart’ (see Kane 1990: 71–76) which eventually became a lexicalized idiomatic expression. Most typically the nouns acting as coverbs are repeated, as in (14f–g). All the coverbs in (14) have in common that no other free lexical element can intervene between the coverb and the light verb, see (21b) and (22b), and that the coverbs cannot be modified syntactically, e.g. by determiners or case markers, such as *wiha-w~wiha-w al-ä* (water-DEF.M~water-DEF.M say\PFV-3SM)
or *wiha~wiha-w-n alä (water~water-DEF.M-ACC say\PFV-3SM) for the construction in (14g).<fnref n="17" /> If a noun preceding the verb alä ‘say’ is marked for definiteness and accusative case (15a) or accompanied by a relational prefix (15b–c), it functions as an adverbial modification, not as a coverb.

(15) a. Baye (1999: 35)

<table><tr><td>kasa</td><td>aster-in</td><td>ginbar-wa-n</td><td>al-at.</td></tr><tr><td>Kasa.M</td><td>Aster.F-ACC</td><td>forehead-POSS.3SF-ACC</td><td>say\PFV.SBJ.3SM-OBJ.3SF</td></tr></table>

‘Kasa hit Aster on her forehead (lit. Kasa said [it] to Aster on her forehead).’

b. Täklä Maryam (1964EC: 47, translation Ronny Meyer (RM))

<table><tr><td>ዕባዋ</td><td>እንደ</td><td>መልቀቅ</td></tr><tr><td>wäba-wa</td><td>indä-</td><td>mä-lk'äk'</td></tr><tr><td>malaria-DEF.F</td><td>like</td><td>VN-leave\VN</td></tr></table>

‘በላኛለች፡፡’

bla-ŋŋ = allä-ttʃ.

say\CNV.SBJ.3SF-OBJ.1SG = AUX.NPST-SBJ.3SF

‘I am almost cured from the malaria (lit. the malaria said to me [something] like leaving).’

c. **mata** *s-i-nnaddäd* **bä-boks**
evening while-3SM-be_angry\IPFV MIL-fist

al-ä-ŋŋ.

say\PFV-SBJ.3SM-OBJ.1SG

‘When he got angry in the evening, he hit me with a clenched fist (...,
he said [it] to me with a clenched fist).’

<footnote n="17">¹⁷ The use of a reduplicated imperative verb as a coverb, as shown in (14h), deviates from this rule. The verb remains invariant in the 2SM, regardless of whether the speaker, who is the actual addressee of the imperative, is male or female. However, the object index is variable and must agree with the person, number and gender of the referent.</footnote>
or *wiha~wiha-w-n alä (water~water-DEF.M-ACC say\PFV-3SM) for the construction in (14g).<fnref n="17" /> If a noun preceding the verb alä ‘say’ is marked for definiteness and accusative case (15a) or accompanied by a relational prefix (15b–c), it functions as an adverbial modification, not as a coverb.

(15) a. Baye (1999: 35)

<table><tr><td>kasa</td><td>aster-in</td><td>ginbar-wa-n</td><td>al-at.</td></tr><tr><td>Kasa.M</td><td>Aster.F-ACC</td><td>forehead-POSS.3SF-ACC</td><td>say\PFV.SBJ.3SM-OBJ.3SF</td></tr></table>

‘Kasa hit Aster on her forehead (lit. Kasa said [it] to Aster on her forehead).’

b. Täklä Maryam (1964EC: 47, translation Ronny Meyer (RM))

<table><tr><td>ዕባዋ</td><td>እንደ</td><td>መልቀቅ</td></tr><tr><td>wäba-wa</td><td>indä-</td><td>mä-lk'äk'</td></tr><tr><td>malaria-DEF.F</td><td>like</td><td>VN-leave\VN</td></tr></table>

‘በላኛለች፡፡’

bla-ŋŋ = allä-ttʃ.

say\CNV.SBJ.3SF-OBJ.1SG = AUX.NPST-SBJ.3SF

‘I am almost cured from the malaria (lit. the malaria said to me [something] like leaving).’

c. mata s-i-nnaddäd bä-boks
evening while-3SM-be_angry\IPFV MIL-fist

al-ä-ŋŋ.

say\PFV-SBJ.3SM-OBJ.1SG

‘When he got angry in the evening, he hit me with a clenched fist (...,
he said [it] to me with a clenched fist).’

<footnote n="17">¹⁷ The use of a reduplicated imperative verb as a coverb, as shown in (14h), deviates from this rule. The verb remains invariant in the 2SM, regardless of whether the speaker, who is the actual addressee of the imperative, is male or female. However, the object index is variable and must agree with the person, number and gender of the referent.</footnote>
In contrast to the complex predicates with a coverb in (14), the adverbial does not necessarily immediately precede the verb *alä* ‘say’, but other constituents can intervene between them, as in (16), which are modifications of the sentences (15a, c).

(16) a. **ginbar-wa-n** sost gize **al-at.**
forehead-POSS.3SF-ACC three time say\PFV.SBJ.3SM-OBJ.3SF
‘On her forehead, he hit her three times.’

b. **bä-boks** mata sost gize **al-ä-jn.**
MIL-fist evening three time say\PFV-SBJ.3SM-OBJ.1SG
‘With a clenched fist, he hit me three times in the evening.’

The verb *alä*, originally meaning ‘say something to someone’, has different semantics depending on the constructions in which it occurs. In complex predicates with a coverb, it only indicates that the denoted situation is noncausal and serves as a host for verbal inflectional morphology (see below). However, when used with adverbials, such as in (15), it forms idiomatic expressions that convey the idea of ‘performing’ or ‘showing’ something related to the adverbial. Without an adverbial and in the imperative conjugation, *alä* functions as an encouragement to perform (usually to repeat) an action, or as a discourse particle with which the speaker announces the end of a discussion or his intended departure (see Meyer 2009: 32–33).

As seen in (14), the verb *alä* ‘say’ is morphologically irregular in Amharic. It uses different bases for the primary conjugations (see Table 1), i.e. *al-* (perfective, verbal noun), *l-* (imperfective), *blä-* (converb) and *bäl-* (imperative), as well as the invariant base *bal* for the mediopassive (*tä-bal-ä* ‘be said’), indirect causative (*as-bal-ä* ‘let say’) and pluractional (e.g. the reciprocal *tä-ba~bal-ä* ‘say to each other’). Although these bases look like suppletive stems nowadays, they all developed from a single Ethiosemitic root, namely √b-h-l ‘say’ (for details, see Baye 1999: 5–29; Leslau 1987: 89).

Semantically, the Amharic verb ‘say’ belongs to the group of verbs of speaking, some of which are shown in (17).

<table><thead><tr><th>(17)</th><th>INTRANSITIVE</th><th>BITRANSITIVE</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>a.</td><td><b>tsohä</b></td><td><b>t'äjjäk'ä</b></td></tr><tr><td>b.</td><td><b>tänsokaſſokä</b></td><td><b>azäzzä</b></td></tr><tr><td>c.</td><td><b>täntäbattäbä</b></td><td><b>näggärä</b></td></tr><tr><td>d.</td><td><b>täkwälattäfä</b></td><td><b>stammer, lisp</b></td></tr></tbody></table>
In contrast to the complex predicates with a coverb in (14), the adverbial does not necessarily immediately precede the verb *alä* ‘say’, but other constituents can intervene between them, as in (16), which are modifications of the sentences (15a, c).

(16) a. **ginbar-wa-n** sost gize **al-at.**
forehead-POSS.3SF-ACC three time say\PFV.SBJ.3SM-OBJ.3SF
‘On her forehead, he hit her three times.’

b. **bä-boks** mata sost gize **al-ä-jn.**
MIL-fist evening three time say\PFV-SBJ.3SM-OBJ.1SG
‘With a clenched fist, he hit me three times in the evening.’

The verb *alä*, originally meaning ‘say something to someone’, has different semantics depending on the constructions in which it occurs. In complex predicates with a coverb, it only indicates that the denoted situation is noncausal and serves as a host for verbal inflectional morphology (see below). However, when used with adverbials, such as in (15), it forms idiomatic expressions that convey the idea of ‘performing’ or ‘showing’ something related to the adverbial. Without an adverbial and in the imperative conjugation, *alä* functions as an encouragement to perform (usually to repeat) an action, or as a discourse particle with which the speaker announces the end of a discussion or his intended departure (see Meyer 2009: 32–33).

As seen in (14), the verb *alä* ‘say’ is morphologically irregular in Amharic. It uses different bases for the primary conjugations (see Table 1), i.e. *al-* (perfective, verbal noun), *l-* (imperfective), *blä-* (converb) and *bäl-* (imperative), as well as the invariant base *bal* for the mediopassive (*tä-bal-ä* ‘be said’), indirect causative (*as-bal-ä* ‘let say’) and pluractional (e.g. the reciprocal *tä-ba~bal-ä* ‘say to each other’). Although these bases look like suppletive stems nowadays, they all developed from a single Ethiosemitic root, namely √b-h-l ‘say’ (for details, see Baye 1999: 5–29; Leslau 1987: 89).

Semantically, the Amharic verb ‘say’ belongs to the group of verbs of speaking, some of which are shown in (17).

<table><thead><tr><th>(17)</th><th>INTRANSITIVE</th><th>BITRANSITIVE</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>a.</td><td><b>tsohä</b> 'cry'</td><td>e. <b>t'äjjäk'ä</b> 'ask'</td></tr><tr><td>b.</td><td><b>tänsokaſſokä</b> 'whisper'</td><td>f. <b>azäzzä</b> 'order'</td></tr><tr><td>c.</td><td><b>täntäbattäbä</b> 'stutter'</td><td>g. <b>näggärä</b> 'report, tell'</td></tr><tr><td>d.</td><td><b>täkwälattäfä</b> 'stammer, lisp'</td><td></td></tr></tbody></table>
The intransitive verbs of speaking have only a subject argument, while the ditransitive verbs have two additional arguments: the addressee (indirect object) and the theme (direct object). The direct object can be an accusative-marked noun phrase (19) or an infinitive clause (18a), a complement clause marked by the complementizer *ind(ä)*-‘that’ (18b), or a direct quotation marked by the converb of the verb ‘say’ (18c), which imbeds the quotations as theme object into the argument frame of the verb ‘ask’. Thus, the converb of ‘say’ in (18c) has a comparable function to the complementizer *indä-* in (18b) and is therefore also analyzed as part of the theme argument. Both objects of ‘say’ are optional, and each of them can also appear on its own.

(18) a. **bä-sälam** *bet* **mä-gbat-attfi-n**
[MIL-peace house VN-enter\VN-POSS.1PL-ACC]_THEME
*t’äjjäk’-ättf-in.
ask\PFV-SBJ.3SF-[OBJ.1PL]_ADDRESSEE

b. **bä-sälam** *bet* **indä-gäbba-n**
[MIL-peace house COMP-enter\PFV-1PL]_THEME
*t’äjjäk’-ättf-in.
ask\PFV-SBJ.3SF-[OBJ.1PL]_ADDRESSEE

c. **bä-sälam** *bet* **gäbba-ttfihw** *bla*
[MIL-peace house enter\PFV-2PL say\CNV.3SF]_THEME
*t’äjjäk’-ättf-in.
ask\PFV-SBJ.3SF-[OBJ.1PL]_ADDRESSEE

‘She asked us whether we got home safely.’

In (18), the addressee of the ditransitive verbs of speaking is marked by the 1PL object index -n on the verb *t’äjjäk’ä* ‘ask’. This object index is optional and can be omitted if the respective addressee is salient in the discourse, as in (19).

(19) Source: Dictionary Abyssinica<fnref n="18" />

<table><tr><td>የቅኔ</td><td>ተማሪ</td><td>የቁጠረውን</td><td>ቋኔ</td></tr><tr><td>jä-k'ine</td><td>tämari</td><td>jä-k'wätt'är-ä-w-in</td><td>k'ine</td></tr><tr><td>LNK-poem</td><td>student</td><td>LNK-count\PFV-SBJ.3SM-OBJ.3SM-ACC</td><td>poem]_THEME</td></tr><tr><td>ለማሳረም</td><td>ለመምህሩ</td><td></td><td>ነገረ፡፡</td></tr><tr><td>lä-massaräm</td><td>lä-mämhir-u</td><td></td><td>näggär-ä.</td></tr></table>

<footnote n="18">¹⁸ https://dictionary.abassinica.com/ነገረ, 23/01/2023</footnote>
The intransitive verbs of speaking have only a subject argument, while the ditransitive verbs have two additional arguments: the addressee (indirect object) and the theme (direct object). The direct object can be an accusative-marked noun phrase (19) or an infinitive clause (18a), a complement clause marked by the complementizer *ind(ä)-‘that’* (18b), or a direct quotation marked by the converb of the verb ‘say’ (18c), which imbeds the quotations as theme object into the argument frame of the verb ‘ask’. Thus, the converb of ‘say’ in (18c) has a comparable function to the complementizer *indä-* in (18b) and is therefore also analyzed as part of the theme argument. Both objects of ‘say’ are optional, and each of them can also appear on its own.

(18) a. **bä-sälam** *bet* **mä-gbat-attfi-n**
[MIL-peace house VN-enter\VN-POSS.1PL-ACC]_THEME
*t’äjjäk’-ättf-in.
ask\PFV-SBJ.3SF-[OBJ.1PL]_ADDRESSEE

b. **bä-sälam** *bet* **indä-gäbba-n**
[MIL-peace house COMP-enter\PFV-1PL]_THEME
*t’äjjäk’-ättf-in.
ask\PFV-SBJ.3SF-[OBJ.1PL]_ADDRESSEE

c. **bä-sälam** *bet* **gäbba-ttfihw** *bla*
[MIL-peace house enter\PFV-2PL say\CNV.3SF]_THEME
*t’äjjäk’-ättf-in.
ask\PFV-SBJ.3SF-[OBJ.1PL]_ADDRESSEE

‘She asked us whether we got home safely.’

In (18), the addressee of the ditransitive verbs of speaking is marked by the 1PL object index -n on the verb *t’äjjäk’ä* ‘ask’. This object index is optional and can be omitted if the respective addressee is salient in the discourse, as in (19).

(19) Source: Dictionary Abyssinica<fnref n="18" />

<table><tr><td>የቅኔ</td><td>ተማሪ</td><td>የቁጠረውን</td><td>ቋኔ</td></tr><tr><td>jä-k'ine</td><td>tämari</td><td>jä-k'wätt'är-ä-w-in</td><td>k'ine</td></tr><tr><td>LNK-poem</td><td>student</td><td>LNK-count\PFV-SBJ.3SM-OBJ.3SM-ACC</td><td>poem]_THEME</td></tr><tr><td>ለማሳረም</td><td>ለመምህሩ</td><td></td><td>ነገረ፡፡</td></tr><tr><td>lä-massaräm</td><td>lä-mämhir-u</td><td></td><td>näggär-ä.</td></tr></table>

<footnote n="18">¹⁸ https://dictionary.abassinica.com/ነገረ, 23/01/2023</footnote>
DAT-VN correct\VN [DAT-teacher-POSS.3SM]ADDRESSEE report\PFV-3SM

‘The poetry student recited the poem which he had composed (lit. counted)
to the teacher for correcting.’

All verbs of speaking can be modified adverbially by a converb clause, which can be
a construction consisting of a coverb and the verb ‘say’, as in (20).

(20) ?u~?u bla tf'oh-ättf.

IDPH.distress say\CNV.3SF cry\PFV-3SF

‘She cried out in distress.’

According to Mengistu (1996: 8–10; 1995: 4–6), the verb *alä* ‘say’ is a generic verb that lacks the inherent manner component of the other verbs of speaking in (17). Its immediately preceding coverb is not an object argument nor an adverbial modification, as it normally cannot be marked for definiteness and accusative case, be passivized (for further details, see Meyer 2009: 23–26) or be pronominalized (i.e. indexed by an object suffix on the verb). In Meyer (2009: 25), I argue therefore that the coverb and the light verb ‘say’ represent a fixed semantic and morphosyntactic construction in which the coverb does not function as a separate syntactic argument.

In contrast to the ditransitive verbs of speaking in (17), no syntactically free
constituent can intervene between the coverb and the verb ‘say’, regardless of whether
the coverb is an ideophone, a quotation, or another element. A construction analogous
to (21a), in which the addressee (*lämämhiru* ‘to the teacher’) immediately precedes
the verb *alä* ‘say’, is ungrammatical (21b).

(21) a. jih *mindin* n-äw bla *lä-mämhir-u* t'äjjäk'-ättf.
PRX.SM what COP-3SM say\CNV.3SF DAT-teacher-DEF.M ask\PFV-3SF
‘She asked the teacher saying, “What is this?”.’

b. *jih *mindin* n-äw *lä-mämhir-u* bla
PRX.SM what COP-3SM DAT-teacher-DEF.M say\CNV.3SF
*t'äjjäk'-ättf.*
ask\PFV-3SF

Similarly, the degree adverb *bät'am* ‘very’ in (14d) cannot occur between the coverb and the verb ‘say’. Thus, a clause like (22b) is unacceptable; instead (22a) is used.
DAT-VN correct\VN [DAT-teacher-POSS.3SM]ADDRESSEE report\PFV-3SM

‘The poetry student recited the poem which he had composed (lit. counted)
to the teacher for correcting.’

All verbs of speaking can be modified adverbially by a converb clause, which can be
a construction consisting of a coverb and the verb ‘say’, as in (20).

(20) ?u~?u bla tf'oh-ättf.

IDPH.distress say\CNV.3SF cry\PFV-3SF

‘She cried out in distress.’

According to Mengistu (1996: 8–10; 1995: 4–6), the verb *alä* ‘say’ is a generic verb that lacks the inherent manner component of the other verbs of speaking in (17). Its immediately preceding coverb is not an object argument nor an adverbial modification, as it normally cannot be marked for definiteness and accusative case, be passivized (for further details, see Meyer 2009: 23–26) or be pronominalized (i.e. indexed by an object suffix on the verb). In Meyer (2009: 25), I argue therefore that the coverb and the light verb ‘say’ represent a fixed semantic and morphosyntactic construction in which the coverb does not function as a separate syntactic argument.

In contrast to the ditransitive verbs of speaking in (17), no syntactically free
constituent can intervene between the coverb and the verb ‘say’, regardless of whether
the coverb is an ideophone, a quotation, or another element. A construction analogous
to (21a), in which the addressee (*lämämhiru* ‘to the teacher’) immediately precedes
the verb *alä* ‘say’, is ungrammatical (21b).

(21) a. jih *mindin* n-äw bla *lä-mämhir-u* t'äjjäk'-ättf.
PRX.SM what COP-3SM say\CNV.3SF DAT-teacher-DEF.M ask\PFV-3SF
‘She asked the teacher saying, “What is this?”.’

b. *jih *mindin* n-äw *lä-mämhir-u* bla
PRX.SM what COP-3SM DAT-teacher-DEF.M say\CNV.3SF
*t'äjjäk'-ättf.*
ask\PFV-3SF

Similarly, the degree adverb *bät'am* ‘very’ in (14d) cannot occur between the coverb and the verb ‘say’. Thus, a clause like (22b) is unacceptable; instead (22a) is used.
(22) a. bät’am däss blo-yn = all.
very IDPH.happy say\CNV.SBJ.3SM-OBJ.1SG = AUX.NPST
‘I am very happy (lit. it made me very happy).’

b. *däss bät’am blo-yn = all.
IDPH.happy very say\CNV.SBJ.3SM-OBJ.1SG = AUX.NPST

However, bound grammatical morphemes can be prefixed to the verb ‘say’, as in
(23a), and the contrastive focus marker -mm can be suffixed to coverbs (23b).

(23) a. t’ärmus-u sibbirr s-i-l
bottle-DEF.M IDPH.break_completely while-3sm-say\IPFV
bät’am dänäggät’-kw.
very be_shocked\PFV-1SG
‘I was very shocked when the bottle broke completely.’

b. Source: Sebiawi<fnref n="19" />

የታገለው ለውጥ የመጣል፤
jä-taggäl-ä-w läwt’ j-amät’all
LNK-struggle\PFV-3SM-DEF.M change 3SM-bring\IPFV = AUX.NPST
‘The one who struggles brings change.’

ያልታገለው ቁጭ ብሎ
j-al-taggäl-ä-w k’uttf’ blo
LNK-NEG-struggle\PFV-3SM-DEF.M IDPH.sit_down say\CNV.3SM

በባርነት ሲገዛ
bä-barinnät s-i-ggäzza
MIL-slavery while-3sm-be_subjugated\IPFV

ይኖራል፤
ji-nor = all;
3SM-live\IPFV = AUX.NPST

‘the one who does not struggle lives subjugated in slavery without any
improvement (lit. by sitting down);’

ቁጭም ባለበት

<footnote n="19">¹⁹ http://sebiawi.blogspot.com/2014/01/blog-post_5253.html, 31/08/2023</footnote>
(22) a. bät’am däss blo-jn = all.
very IDPH.happy say\CNV.SBJ.3SM-OBJ.1SG = AUX.NPST
‘I am very happy (lit. it made me very happy).’

b. *däss bät’am blo-jn = all.
IDPH.happy very say\CNV.SBJ.3SM-OBJ.1SG = AUX.NPST

However, bound grammatical morphemes can be prefixed to the verb ‘say’, as in
(23a), and the contrastive focus marker -mm can be suffixed to coverbs (23b).

(23) a. t’ärmus-u sibbirr s-i-l
bottle-DEF.M IDPH.break_completely while-3sm-say\IPFV
bät’am dänäggät’-kw.
very be_shocked\PFV-1SG
‘I was very shocked when the bottle broke completely.’

b. Source: Sebiawi<fnref n="19" />

የታገለው ለውጥ የመጣል፤
jä-taggäl-ä-w läwt’ j-amät’all
LNK-struggle\PFV-3SM-DEF.M change 3SM-bring\IPFV = AUX.NPST
‘The one who struggles brings change.’

ያልታገለው ቁጭ ብሎ
j-al-taggäl-ä-w k’uttf’ blo
LNK-NEG-struggle\PFV-3SM-DEF.M IDPH.sit_down say\CNV.3SM

በባርነት ሲገዛ
bä-barinnät s-i-ggäzza
MIL-slavery while-3sm-be_subjugated\IPFV

ይኖራል፤
ji-nor = all;
3SM-live\IPFV = AUX.NPST

‘the one who does not struggle lives subjugated in slavery without any improvement (lit. by sitting down);’

ቁጭም ባለበት

<footnote n="19">¹⁹ http://sebiawi.blogspot.com/2014/01/blog-post_5253.html, 31/08/2023</footnote>
k'utʃf'-imm

bä-al-ä-bb-ät

IDPH.sit_down-FOC

MIL-say\PFV-SBJ.3SM-MIL-OBJ.3SM

ይሞታል

መለት

ነው።

ji-mot = all

malät

n-äw.

3SM-die\IPFV = AUX.NPST

say\VN

COP-3SM

‘that means that he dies in exactly the situation in which he is (lit. where he is sitting down).’

Many complex predicates with the verb ‘say’ seem only to have a subject argument, and thus appear to be intransitive (see, e.g., Leslau 1995: 583; and for Ethiosemitic in general, Cohen et al. 2002: 236; Ferguson 1970: 74). However, some of them also have an overt object (24a) or cross-reference it with an object index on the verb (24b) (see Meyer 2009: 36–38). Formally, the object constituents in (24) are marked like a primary object of a monotransitive verb, i.e. with the accusative suffix -n in (24a) and with the simple object index on the verb in (24a, b) – in contrast to the applied object in (25), in which the object index is preceded by the applicative suffix -bb (glossed MIL).

(24) a. hizb-u

korona-n

[people-DEF.M]ᵢ

[COVID-ACC]ⱼ

tʃila

blo-t = all.

IDPH ignore say\CNV.SBJ.3SMᵢ-OBJ.3SMⱼ = AUX.NPST

‘The people ignored the COVID disease.’

b. goräbet-e-n

sälam s-i-l-at

neighbor-POSS.1SG-ACC peace while-SBJ.1SG-say\IPFV-OBJ.3SF

zimm

al-ättʃ-ijŋ.

IDPH.silent say\PFV-SBJ.3SF-OBJ.1SG

‘When I greeted my neighbor, she kept silent to me.’

(25) atkilt-ottʃ-e

t'iwilligg

al-u-bb-ijŋ.

vegetable-PL-POSS.1SG

IDPH.wilt

say\PFV-SBJ.3PL-MIL-OBJ.1SG

‘My vegetables wilted on me [i.e. to my detriment].’

Complex predicates with the verb ‘say’ can also function as experiencer verbs, by cross-referencing the experiencer with the object index on the verb (26).
k'utʃf'-imm

bä-al-ä-bb-ät

IDPH.sit_down-FOC

MIL-say\PFV-SBJ.3SM-MIL-OBJ.3SM

ይሞታል

መለት

ነው።

ji-mot = all

malät

n-äw.

3SM-die\IPFV = AUX.NPST

say\VN

COP-3SM

‘that means that he dies in exactly the situation in which he is (lit. where he is sitting down).’

Many complex predicates with the verb ‘say’ seem only to have a subject argument, and thus appear to be intransitive (see, e.g., Leslau 1995: 583; and for Ethiosemitic in general, Cohen et al. 2002: 236; Ferguson 1970: 74). However, some of them also have an overt object (24a) or cross-reference it with an object index on the verb (24b) (see Meyer 2009: 36–38). Formally, the object constituents in (24) are marked like a primary object of a monotransitive verb, i.e. with the accusative suffix -n in (24a) and with the simple object index on the verb in (24a, b) – in contrast to the applied object in (25), in which the object index is preceded by the applicative suffix -bb (glossed MIL).

(24) a. hizb-u

korona-n

[people-DEF.M]ᵢ

[COVID-ACC]ⱼ

tʃila

blo-t = all.

IDPH ignore say\CNV.SBJ.3SMᵢ-OBJ.3SMⱼ = AUX.NPST

‘The people ignored the COVID disease.’

b. goräbet-e-n

sälam s-i-l-at

neighbor-POSS.1SG-ACC peace while-SBJ.1SG-say\IPFV-OBJ.3SF

zimm

al-ättʃ-ijŋ.

IDPH.silent say\PFV-SBJ.3SF-OBJ.1SG

‘When I greeted my neighbor, she kept silent to me.’

(25) atkilt-ottʃ-e

t'iwilligg

al-u-bb-ijŋ.

vegetable-PL-POSS.1SG

IDPH.wilt

say\PFV-SBJ.3PL-MIL-OBJ.1SG

‘My vegetables wilted on me [i.e. to my detriment].’

Complex predicates with the verb ‘say’ can also function as experiencer verbs, by cross-referencing the experiencer with the object index on the verb (26).
(26) a. b-alläf-ä-w j-al-kä-jn
MIL-pass\PFV-SBJ.3SM-OBJ.3SM LNK-say\PFV-SBJ.2SM-OBJ.1SG

tizz blo-jn = all.

IDPH.remember say\CNV.SBJ.3SM-OBJ.1SG = AUX.NPST
'It reminded me of what you said to me last time.'

b. abbat-inna innat-e
father-and mother-POSS.1SG

niffikk' al-u-jn.

IDPH.yearn_very_much say\PFV-SBJ.3PL-OBJ.1SG

‘I miss my parents (lit. father and mother) very much.’

Since the verb ‘say’ in complex predicates can have an additional non-subject argument, namely the addressee of the verbal action marked with the simple object index, e.g. (14a) and (18), it must be monotransitive (see Meyer 2009: 23–27). Consequently, the verb ‘say’ is the only verb of speaking with two arguments, while all other verbs of speaking in (17) are either intransitive or ditransitive.

According to Wetter (1999; 2002) and Crass et al. (2001), the verb ‘say’ in combination with a coverb has been grammaticalized by extending the semantics of the subject from an agentive human, e.g. (14a), to a non-human participant (14b), which then opened the way for the formation of a number of new complex predicates based on different types of coverbs, not limited to direct quotations, as shown in the remaining examples in (14). In Amharic, these complex predicates have become so productive that they now form a separate class of verbs, alongside the class of simple verbs derived from roots by nonconcatenative morphology (see Table 1 in Section 1).

Complex predicates with an ideophone as coverb form a distinct subtype because they usually occur in pairs expressing a causal/noncausal contrast using the light verbs *alä* ‘say’ and *adärrägä* ‘do’, respectively. Simple verbs, on the other hand, derive causative verbs morphologically, e.g. *bässälä* ‘be ripe, be cooked’ vs. the causatives *a-bässälä* ‘ripen, cook’ and *as-bässälä* ‘have something cooked’ (see Kane 1990: 896–897), not by alternating light verbs (see Mengistu 2010: 292–294).

Moreover, only complex predicates with an ideophone as coverb express the causal/noncausal contrast with the two light verbs *alä* ‘say’ and *adärrägä* ‘do’, as shown in (13). Consequently, the coverbs in constructions like (14e–h) are not ideophones, as they only cooccur with the noncausal verb *alä* ‘say’ but never with its
(26) a. b-alläf-ä-w j-al-kä-jn
MIL-pass\PFV-SBJ.3SM-OBJ.3SM LNK-say\PFV-SBJ.2SM-OBJ.1SG

tizz blo-jn = all.

IDPH.remember say\CNV.SBJ.3SM-OBJ.1SG = AUX.NPST
‘It reminded me of what you said to me last time.’

b. abbat-inna innat-e
father-and mother-POSS.1SG

niffikk' al-u-jn.

IDPH.yearn_very_much say\PFV-SBJ.3PL-OBJ.1SG

‘I miss my parents (lit. father and mother) very much.’

Since the verb ‘say’ in complex predicates can have an additional non-subject argument, namely the addressee of the verbal action marked with the simple object index, e.g. (14a) and (18), it must be monotransitive (see Meyer 2009: 23–27). Consequently, the verb ‘say’ is the only verb of speaking with two arguments, while all other verbs of speaking in (17) are either intransitive or ditransitive.

According to Wetter (1999; 2002) and Crass et al. (2001), the verb ‘say’ in combination with a coverb has been grammaticalized by extending the semantics of the subject from an agentive human, e.g. (14a), to a non-human participant (14b), which then opened the way for the formation of a number of new complex predicates based on different types of coverbs, not limited to direct quotations, as shown in the remaining examples in (14). In Amharic, these complex predicates have become so productive that they now form a separate class of verbs, alongside the class of simple verbs derived from roots by nonconcatenative morphology (see Table 1 in Section 1).

Complex predicates with an ideophone as coverb form a distinct subtype because they usually occur in pairs expressing a causal/noncausal contrast using the light verbs *alä* ‘say’ and *adärrägä* ‘do’, respectively. Simple verbs, on the other hand, derive causative verbs morphologically, e.g. *bässälä* ‘be ripe, be cooked’ vs. the causatives *a-bässälä* ‘ripen, cook’ and *as-bässälä* ‘have something cooked’ (see Kane 1990: 896–897), not by alternating light verbs (see Mengistu 2010: 292–294).

Moreover, only complex predicates with an ideophone as coverb express the causal/noncausal contrast with the two light verbs *alä* ‘say’ and *adärrägä* ‘do’, as shown in (13). Consequently, the coverbs in constructions like (14e–h) are not ideophones, as they only cooccur with the noncausal verb *alä* ‘say’ but never with its
causal counterpart *adärrägä* ‘do’. Furthermore, there are also a number of complex predicates based on the verb *adärrägä* ‘do’, not *alä* ‘say’, whose coverb is often a loanword (see Section 7).

As with the verb *alä* ‘say’, the ideophones in complex predicates with *adärrägä* ‘do’ do not represent a theme argument or an adverbial, but are simply juxtaposed to the light verb with which they form a fixed lexical and morphosyntactic construction. As shown in (27), no other free syntactic constituent can intervene between the ideophone and the light verb *adärrägä* ‘do’. Sentence (27b), for instance, is unacceptable because the place adverbial *wädä gon* appears between the ideophone and the light verb.

(27) a. *borsa-wa-in wädä gon k’uttf’ adärräg-ättf.*

bag-DEF.F-ACC towards side IDPH.sit do\PFV-3SF

‘She put her bag down sideways.’

b. \*borsa-wa-in k’uttf’ wädä gon adärräg-ättf.*

bag-DEF.F-ACC IDPH.sit towards side do\PFV-3SF

The light verb *adärrägä* ‘do’ is typically used (mono)transitively, but can also appear like an intransitive verb with a single subject argument, especially with ideophones expressing an activity, as in *tf’iffirr adärrägä* (IDPH.dance do\PFV.3SM) ‘he does dancing’ (Mengistu 2010: 301). In transitive use, the valence of *adärrägä* includes a patient object that is directly affected by the verbal event.

Although the opposition noncausal/causal is typical for complex predicates with an ideophone as coverb, for semantic reasons not all ideophones occur with the two light verbs (Mengistu 2010: 301–303). For example, most ideophones derived from an intransitive root (see Section 6) whose agentive subject is not affected by the verbal event lack the noncausal complex predicate, as in *ziffinn adärrägä* ‘do singing’ (*< √z-f-n ‘sing’*) without noncausal \*ziffinn *alä*. In contrast, ideophones derived from intransitive roots in which the subject is also affected by the verbal event often lack the causal complex predicate, e.g. *adägg alä* ‘grow a little bit’ (*< √a-d-g ‘grow’*), but no causal \*adägg *adärrägä*.

Another peculiar feature of certain ideophones in complex predicates is their ability to combine with another pair of light verbs, namely noncausal *täsäŋŋä* ‘be named, be desired’ vs. causal *assäŋŋä* ‘name, feel like doing’, as in *däss täsäŋŋä* ‘be happy’ vs. *däss assäŋŋä* ‘make happy’ (Leslau 1995: 584; Kane 1990: 560–561). Whereas the occurrence
causal counterpart *adärrägä* ‘do’. Furthermore, there are also a number of complex predicates based on the verb *adärrägä* ‘do’, not *alä* ‘say’, whose coverb is often a loanword (see Section 7).

As with the verb *alä* ‘say’, the ideophones in complex predicates with *adärrägä* ‘do’ do not represent a theme argument or an adverbial, but are simply juxtaposed to the light verb with which they form a fixed lexical and morphosyntactic construction. As shown in (27), no other free syntactic constituent can intervene between the ideophone and the light verb *adärrägä* ‘do’. Sentence (27b), for instance, is unacceptable because the place adverbial *wädä gon* appears between the ideophone and the light verb.

(27) a. *borsa-wa-in wädä gon k’uttf’ adärräg-ättf.*

bag-DEF.F-ACC towards side IDPH.sit do\PFV-3SF

‘She put her bag down sideways.’

b. \*borsa-wa-in k’uttf’ wädä gon adärräg-ättf.*

bag-DEF.F-ACC IDPH.sit towards side do\PFV-3SF

The light verb *adärrägä* ‘do’ is typically used (mono)transitively, but can also appear like an intransitive verb with a single subject argument, especially with ideophones expressing an activity, as in *tf’iffirr adärrägä* (IDPH.dance do\PFV.3SM) ‘he does dancing’ (Mengistu 2010: 301). In transitive use, the valence of *adärrägä* includes a patient object that is directly affected by the verbal event.

Although the opposition noncausal/causal is typical for complex predicates with an ideophone as coverb, for semantic reasons not all ideophones occur with the two light verbs (Mengistu 2010: 301–303). For example, most ideophones derived from an intransitive root (see Section 6) whose agentive subject is not affected by the verbal event lack the noncausal complex predicate, as in *ziffinn adärrägä* ‘do singing’ (*< √z-f-n ‘sing’*) without noncausal \*ziffinn *alä*. In contrast, ideophones derived from intransitive roots in which the subject is also affected by the verbal event often lack the causal complex predicate, e.g. *adägg alä* ‘grow a little bit’ (*< √a-d-g ‘grow’*), but no causal \*adägg *adärrägä*.

Another peculiar feature of certain ideophones in complex predicates is their ability to combine with another pair of light verbs, namely noncausal *täsäŋŋä* ‘be named, be desired’ vs. causal *assäŋŋä* ‘name, feel like doing’, as in *däss täsäŋŋä* ‘be happy’ vs. *däss assäŋŋä* ‘make happy’ (Leslau 1995: 584; Kane 1990: 560–561). Whereas the occurrence
of the noncausal light verb täsäŋŋä is limited to ideophones as coverb, the causal assäŋŋä
can also cooccur with other elements, as the verbal noun phrase in (28).

(28) Leslau (1995: 584)

wädä timhirt_bet mä-hed al-assäŋŋä-w-imm.

towards school VN-go\VN NEG-feel_to_do\PFV.SBJ.3SM-OBJ.3SM-NEG
‘He doesn’t feel up to going to school.’

In some cases, the mediopassive and the causative of ädärrägä ‘do’, i.e. tädärrägä ‘be done’ and asdärrägä ‘let do’, can be also used as light verbs (Leslau 1995: 583). In addition, asbalä ‘make say, let say’, the causative of the irregular verb alä ‘say’, is attested in causal expressions like (29).

(29) Source: Youtube<fnref n="20" />

በጥያቄዎ ሪገግ አስባለችው::

bä-t'ijjak'e-wa fägägg asbal-ättf-iw.

MIL-question-POSS.3SF IDPH.smile make_say\PFV-SBJ.3SF-OBJ.3SM
‘She made him laugh with her question.’

The use of asbalä as a light verb seems to be a more recent development, as it has so far
not been mentioned in Amharic grammars.

5. Reduplicated ideophones

Ideophones can be partially or fully reduplicated, see, e.g., (6) and (30).

(30) Source: Youtube<fnref n="21" />

አንዴ ቁጭ ቁጭ በሉ!

ande k'utf'~k'utf' bäl-u! (<k'utf' al-ä)

once IDPH.sit_down~PLR say\IMP-2PL IDPH.sit_down say\PFV-3SM

'Sit down right now!' [to a crowd of
people]

' sit down

<footnote n="20">²⁰ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v = vSaWYSuJK8k, 23/01/2023</footnote>

<footnote n="21">²¹ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v = hSau6GWJig8, 23/01/2023</footnote>
of the noncausal light verb täsäŋŋä is limited to ideophones as coverb, the causal assäŋŋä
can also cooccur with other elements, as the verbal noun phrase in (28).

(28) Leslau (1995: 584)

wädä timhirt_bet mä-hed al-assäŋŋä-w-imm.

towards school VN-go\VN NEG-feel_to_do\PFV.SBJ.3SM-OBJ.3SM-NEG
‘He doesn’t feel up to going to school.’

In some cases, the mediopassive and the causative of ädärrägä ‘do’, i.e. tädärrägä ‘be done’ and asdärrägä ‘let do’, can be also used as light verbs (Leslau 1995: 583). In addition, asbalä ‘make say, let say’, the causative of the irregular verb alä ‘say’, is attested in causal expressions like (29).

(29) Source: Youtube<fnref n="20" />

በጥያቄዎ ሪገግ አስባለችው::

bä-t'ijjak'e-wa fägägg asbal-ättf-iw.

MIL-question-POSS.3SF IDPH.smile make_say\PFV-SBJ.3SF-OBJ.3SM
‘She made him laugh with her question.’

The use of asbalä as a light verb seems to be a more recent development, as it has so far
not been mentioned in Amharic grammars.

5. Reduplicated ideophones

Ideophones can be partially or fully reduplicated, see, e.g., (6) and (30).

(30) Source: Youtube<fnref n="21" />

አንዴ ቁጭ ቁጭ በሉ!

ande k'utf'~k'utf' bäl-u! (<k'utf' al-ä)

once IDPH.sit_down~PLR say\IMP-2PL IDPH.sit_down say\PFV-3SM

'Sit down right now!' [to a crowd of
people]

' sit down

<footnote n="20">²⁰ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v = vSaWYSuJK8k, 23/01/2023</footnote>

<footnote n="21">²¹ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v = hSau6GWJig8, 23/01/2023</footnote>
Full reduplication, however, is also found with other types of coverb in complex predicates (see, e.g., examples (14f-h)). Full reduplication occurs with all ideophones (31a-f), whereas partial reduplication only occurs with multisyllabic ideophones (31f-i).

(31) Leslau (1995: 593–594)

<table><tr><td>a.</td><td>t'äbb alä</td><td>'drop'</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>t'äbb~t'äbb alä</td><td>'drip'</td></tr><tr><td>b.</td><td>zikk' alä</td><td>'be low'</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>zikk'~zikk' alä</td><td>'get continuously lower'</td></tr><tr><td>c.</td><td>tf'arr adärrägä</td><td>'scratch a little or abruptly'</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>tf'arr~tf'arr adärrägä</td><td>'scratch here and there'</td></tr><tr><td>d.</td><td>t'ät'a adärrägä</td><td>'sip, drink slowly'</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>t'ät'a~t'ät'a adärrägä</td><td>'drink hurriedly'</td></tr><tr><td>e.</td><td>mullittf' alä</td><td>'slip off'</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>mullittf'~mullittf' alä</td><td>'become slippery'</td></tr><tr><td>f.</td><td>billittf' alä</td><td>'flash suddenly'</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>billittf'~billittf' alä</td><td>'keep flashing continually'</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>bitittf'~bitittf' alä</td><td>'glitter'</td></tr><tr><td>g.</td><td>ziggitt adärrägä</td><td>'close suddenly and tightly'</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>zigit~gitt adärrägä</td><td>'close all around'</td></tr><tr><td>h.</td><td>bissitt adärrägä</td><td>'pierce completely'</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>bisit~sitt adärrägä</td><td>'riddle (with bullets)'</td></tr><tr><td>i.</td><td>nikk'il alä</td><td>'be suddenly uprooted'</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>nik'il~k'il alä</td><td>'be completely uprooted'</td></tr></table>

A formal distinction between full and partial reduplication is found in the gemination pattern. While in full reduplication the gemination of consonants is retained (31a-e), in partial reduplication it is limited to the final consonant, as shown in (31g-i) and (32b).

Partial and full reduplication of ideophones has a number of senses that can be derived from a general distributive or pluractional meaning, namely senses of higher intensity (generally continuity and frequency of the denoted verbal event), as in (31a, b, e-i), but also of accelerated speed (31d) (Leslau 1995: 593). In addition, Baye (2008: 226–227) notes that multiple partial reduplication is used to express emphasis, e.g. regarding the speed of the action or the commitment of the subject, as in (32).
Full reduplication, however, is also found with other types of coverb in complex predicates (see, e.g., examples (14f-h)). Full reduplication occurs with all ideophones (31a-f), whereas partial reduplication only occurs with multisyllabic ideophones (31f-i).

(31) Leslau (1995: 593–594)

<table><tr><td>a.</td><td>t'äbb alä</td><td>'drop'</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>t'äbb~t'äbb alä</td><td>'drip'</td></tr><tr><td>b.</td><td>zikk' alä</td><td>'be low'</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>zikk'~zikk' alä</td><td>'get continuously lower'</td></tr><tr><td>c.</td><td>tf'arr adärrägä</td><td>'scratch a little or abruptly'</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>tf'arr~tf'arr adärrägä</td><td>'scratch here and there'</td></tr><tr><td>d.</td><td>t'ät'a adärrägä</td><td>'sip, drink slowly'</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>t'ät'a~t'ät'a adärrägä</td><td>'drink hurriedly'</td></tr><tr><td>e.</td><td>mullittf' alä</td><td>'slip off'</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>mullittf'~mullittf' alä</td><td>'become slippery'</td></tr><tr><td>f.</td><td>billittf' alä</td><td>'flash suddenly'</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>billittf'~billittf' alä</td><td>'keep flashing continually'</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>bitittf'~bitittf' alä</td><td>'glitter'</td></tr><tr><td>g.</td><td>ziggitt adärrägä</td><td>'close suddenly and tightly'</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>zigit~gitt adärrägä</td><td>'close all around'</td></tr><tr><td>h.</td><td>bissitt adärrägä</td><td>'pierce completely'</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>bisit~sitt adärrägä</td><td>'riddle (with bullets)'</td></tr><tr><td>i.</td><td>nikk'il alä</td><td>'be suddenly uprooted'</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>nik'il~k'il alä</td><td>'be completely uprooted'</td></tr></table>

A formal distinction between full and partial reduplication is found in the gemination pattern. While in full reduplication the gemination of consonants is retained (31a-e), in partial reduplication it is limited to the final consonant, as shown in (31g-i) and (32b).

Partial and full reduplication of ideophones has a number of senses that can be derived from a general distributive or pluractional meaning, namely senses of higher intensity (generally continuity and frequency of the denoted verbal event), as in (31a, b, e-i), but also of accelerated speed (31d) (Leslau 1995: 593). In addition, Baye (2008: 226–227) notes that multiple partial reduplication is used to express emphasis, e.g. regarding the speed of the action or the commitment of the subject, as in (32).
(32) Baye (2008: 227, translation RM)

a. ካሳ ወረቀቱን ቅድድ አደረገው።

kasa wäräk’ät-u-n k’iddidd adärräg-ä-w.

Kasa.M paper-DEF.M-ACC IDPH.tear do\PFV-SBJ.3SM-OBJ.3SM
‘Kasa tore the paper completely.’

b. ካሳ ወረቀቱን ቅድድድ

kasa wäräk’ät-u-n k’id~id~id~idd

Kasa.M paper-DEF.M-ACC IDPH.tear~PLR~PLR~PLR

አደረገው።

adärräg-ä-w.

do\PFV-SBJ.3SM-OBJ.3SM

‘Kasa tore up the (sheet of) paper very quickly and completely.’

According to Baye (2008: 226–227), the number of recurrent partial reduplications of a syllable is not limited, and it can occur many times depending on the discourse context (see also Teferi & Baye 2022a: 115).

A special type of ideophones related to full reduplication are so-called “echo-words”, i.e. the combination of two juxtaposed ideophones that either denote a semantic contrast (33) or two different aspects of the same general meaning, as in *bitt’iss k’int’iss alä* ‘break abruptly and completely; die prematurely’, where *bitt’iss* is related to *bätt’äsä* ‘detach, snap’ and *k’int’iss* to *k’änätt’äsä* ‘snap off with the fingers’.

(33) Baye (2008: 229, translation RM)

ካሳ ሊራተባ እያለ

kasa fära_täba ijjal-ä

Kasa.M IDPH.hesitant [< fear_be.courageous ] PROG.say\PFV-3SM

ወደ ቢት ገባ።

wädä bet gäbba.

towards house enter\PFV-3SM

‘Kasa entered hesitantly into the house.’

An exhaustive list of echo-words in Amharic, as well as in Tigre and Tigrinya, is found
in Leslau (1961). Amharic echo-words are also described in some detail in Teferi &
Baye (2022a: 106–108), Baye (2008: 228–229) and Leslau (1995: 594–596). Some of
them are shown in (34).