# Question Formation in || Gana, a Khoesan Language

Rose M. Letsholor

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

OpenEdition
Journals

**Electronic version**

URL: https://journals.openedition.org/lla/12150

DOI: 10.4000/lla.12150

ISSN: 2822-7468

**Publisher**

Llacan UMR 8135 CNRS/Inalco

**Printed version**

Date of publication: December 31, 2016

Number of pages: 77-94

ISSN: 2429-2230

**Electronic reference**

Rose M. Letsholor, "Question Formation in || Gana, a Khoesan Language", *Linguistique et langues africaines* [Online], 2 | 2016, Online since 21 September 2023, connection on 01 October 2023. URL: http://journals.openedition.org/lla/12150; DOI: https://doi.org/10.4000/lla.12150

<figure><img src="image_2.png" /></figure>
#02

Juin 2016

<figure><img src="image_3.png" /></figure>

LLA

Linguistique
et Langues
Africaines

<figure><img src="image_4.png" /></figure>

- Additive Coordination, Comitative Adjunction, and Associative Plural in Tswana

- The Locative System in Cuwabo and Makhuwa

- Question Formation in ||Gana

- La liaison tonale en shingazidja septentrional

- Comptes-rendus / Book Reviews

<figure><img src="image_5.png" /></figure>

9 782359 351811

ISSN 2429-2230
ISBN 978-2-35935-181-1 20 €

<figure><img src="image_6.png" /></figure>

Lambert-Lucas
LLA

Linguistique
et Langues
Africaines

<figure><img src="image_7.png" /></figure>

#02

Juin 2016

1. Additive Coordination, Comitative Adjunction, and Associative Plural in Tswana (Denis Creissels) 11

2. The Locative System in Cuwabo and Makhuwa (P30 Bantu Languages) (Rozenn Guérois) 43

3. Question Formation in ||Gana, a Khoesan Language (Rose Letsholor) 77

4. La liaison tonale en shingazidja septentrional (Cédric Patin) 95

Comptes-rendus / Book Reviews

Aliou Mohamadou, Le Verbe en peul : Formes et valeurs en pulaar du Fuuta-Tooro (2ᵉ édition) par Viktoria Apel 117

Michka Sachnine, Grammaire du yorùbá standard (Nigéria) par Nicolas Aubry 121

Anne Storch, A Grammar of Luwo: An Anthropological Approach par Noam Faust 125

Wilhelm J. G. Möhlig, Atlas of Kamba Dialects (Kenya Bantu E.55). Phonological and Lexical Comparison par Lolke J. van der Veen 131

Jacques Rongier, Dictionnaire éwé-français par Kofi Yakpo 135

Photo de couverture : Nicolas Quint : Vannier fabriquant un panier avec des nervures de rônier, village de Djifanghor, Sénégal, 2011.

Couverture : Jean-Irénée Cuin

Production et diffusion : Éditions Lambert-Lucas
LLA

Linguistique
et Langues
Africaines

<figure><img src="image_8.png" /></figure>

International Journal edited by
Revue internationale éditée par le LLACAN
(UMR 8135 CNRS / INALCO / PRES Sorbonne Paris Cité)

# 2 – 2016
Diffusion

Éditions Lambert-Lucas
4 rue d'Isly - 87000 LIMOGES (France)
Tél 05 55 77 12 36
Fax 05 87 84 00 11
Por 06 44 78 30 73

Cette revue est en accès libre, sans barrière mobile,
téléchargeable sur le site des éditions Lambert-Lucas

n° 1, juin 2015 :

http://www.lambert-lucas.com/linguistique-et-langues-africaines

n° 2, juin 2016 :

http://www.lambert-lucas.com/linguistiques-langues-africaines-2

Pour des exemplaires sur papier,
merci d'écrire à lla.ll@free.fr

© Éditions Lambert-Lucas, 2016
ISSN 2429-2230
ISBN 978-2-35935-181-1
**Comité scientifique**

Emilio BONVINI (LLACAN, CNRS), Denis CREISSELS (DDL, Université Lyon 2), Claude HAGÈGE (EPHE), Bernd HEINE (University of Cologne), Larry HYMAN (University of California - Berkeley), Sambieni KOFFI (Université d'Abomey-Calavi), Jérémie KOUADIO (Université d'Abidjan), Friederike LÜPKE (SOAS, University of London), Gudrun MIEHE (University of Bayreuth), Maarten MOUS (Leiden University), Papa Alioune NDAO (Université Cheick Anta Diop de Dakar), Margarida PETTERS (Universidade de São Paulo), Thilo SCHADEBERG (Leiden University), John MCWHORTER (Columbia University).

**Comité de rédaction**

Nicolas AUBRY (LLACAN, INALCO), Mélanie BOURLET (LLACAN, INALCO), Pascal BOYELDIEU (LLACAN, CNRS), Gwenaëlle FABRE (LLL, Université d'Orléans), Maximilien GUÉRIN (LLACAN, Université Paris 3), Sophie MANUS (DDL, Université Lyon 2), Aliou MOHAMADOU (LLACAN, INALCO), Sylvester OSU (LLL, Université de Tours), Yvonne TREIS (LLACAN, CNRS), Marie-Claude SIMEONE-SENELLE (LLACAN, CNRS), Valentin VYDRIN (LLACAN, INALCO).

**Rédaction**

Paulette ROULON-DOKO (LLACAN, CNRS), Nicolas QUINT (LLACAN, CNRS), Loïc-Michel PERRIN (LLACAN, INALCO).

**Administration**

Jeanne ZERNER

**Directeur de la publication**

Mark VAN DE VELDE
## Contact

LLACAN (UMR 8135, campus du CNRS)
7, rue Guy-Môquet
94801 VILLEJUIF Cedex - France
http://llacan.vjf.cnrs.fr/lla
llafrique@cnrs.fr

## Consignes de soumission

http://llacan.vjf.cnrs.fr/lla

## Comptes-rendus

Les ouvrages sont à adresser à
Maximilien Guérin (maximilien.guerin@cnrs.fr)
(s/c de Loïc-Michel Perrin et Nicolas Quint)
LLACAN (UMR 8135, campus du CNRS)
7, rue Guy-Môquet
94801 VILLEJUIF Cedex - France
# Sommaire

1. Additive Coordination, Comitative Adjunction, and Associative Plural in Tswana .................................................... 11
Denis CREISSELS

2. The Locative System in Cuwabo and Makhuwa (P30 Bantu Languages) ................................................................. 43
Rozenn GUÉROIS

3. Question Formation in Gana, a Khoesan Language ................................................................. 77
Rose M. LETSHOLOR

4. La liaison tonale en shingazidja septentrional ................................................................. 95
Cédric PATIN

## Comptes-rendus de lecture / Book Review

Aliou Mohamadou :
*Le Verbe en peul : Formes et valeurs en pulaar du Fuuta-Tooro (2ᵉ édition)* .................................................................................... 117
par Viktoria APEL

Michka Sachnine :
*Grammaire du yorùbá standard (Nigéria)* ................................................................. 121
par Nicolas AUBRY

Anne Storch :
*A Grammar of Luwo: An Anthropological Approach* .................................................... 125
par Noam FAUST

Wilhelm J. G. Möhlig :
*Atlas of Kamba Dialects (Kenya Bantu E.55). Phonological and Lexical Comparison* .................................................... 131
par Lolke J. VAN DER VEEN

Jacques Rongier :
*Dictionnaire éwé-français* .................................................................................... 135
par Kofi YAKPO
# Question Formation in ||Gana, a Khoesan Language

Rose M. Letsholor

## Abstract

||Gana is one of Botswana's indigenous languages. It belongs to the Western branch of the Central Khoesan group of languages. Not much is known about the syntax of this language, which is now facing extinction. This paper makes a contribution towards documenting ||Gana by investigating question formation in this language. It specifically aims at answering to two questions, namely (a) What are the different question words that ||Gana uses to form content questions? and (b) What positions do these question words occupy in this language? Regarding question (a), I show that ||Gana has two basic forms used to produce content questions: máá- and nùú and that a third form, hi-, is used specifically in questions where the gender of the question personed is unknown. Máá- is the basic form corresponding to English argument question words 'who', 'which', 'whose' and 'whom' and it is also the basic form for the adjunct questions 'where', 'how' and 'when'. Nùú is the basic form corresponding to 'what' and 'why'. Regarding question (b), there are three main positions that question words can occupy in ||Gana: (i) sentence initial, (ii) after subject, and (iii) after a fronted object in transitive or ditransitive structures. An interesting finding is that question words never occur in sentence final position in ||Gana irrespective of whether the question word is an argument of the verb (subject, direct or indirect object) or an adjunct. This suggests that, in ||Gana, the sentence-final position is not a focus position given that question words are treated in the literature as focused constituents.

## Keywords

Khoesan, SOV, flexible word order, adjunct/argument question word, PGN markers.
Résumé

Le ||Gana est une langue autochtone du Botswana qui fait partie du groupe occidental du khoïsan central. La syntaxe du ||gana, une langue désormais menacée d'extinction, reste encore largement méconnue. Cet article a pour objet de faire progresser la documentation du ||gana en se concentrant sur les structures interrogatives attestées dans cette langue. On s'efforcera en particulier de répondre aux deux questions suivantes : (a) Quelles sont les différents interrogatifs utilisés par le ||gana dans les interrogations partielles ?, et (b) Quelle position occupent ces interrogatifs dans la phrase ||gana ? En ce qui concerne la question (a), je démontre que le ||gana génère la plupart de ses interrogations partielles à partir de deux formes de base, máá - et nùú ; par ailleurs, il existe une troisième forme, hi-, qui est utilisée uniquement dans les structures interrogatives où le locuteur ignore le genre de la personne à propos de laquelle il pose une question. La forme de base máá- correspond aux interrogatifs anglais 'who', 'which', 'whose' et 'whom' [français (à) qui, quel], et c'est aussi cette forme qui permet de produire les interrogatifs adverbiaux correspondant aux termes anglais 'where', 'how' et 'when' [français comment, où, quand]. La forme de base nùú correspond, elle, aux interrogatifs anglais 'what' et 'why' [français quoi/que et pourquoi]. En ce qui concerne la question (b), j'ai trouvé que les interrogatifs peuvent occuper trois positions distinctes en ||gana, à savoir: (i) en début de phrase, (ii) à la suite du sujet, et (iii) à la suite d'un objet antéposé en début de phrase dans des constructions transitives ou ditransitives. Un autre résultat intéressant de mes recherches est le fait que, en ||gana, les interrogatifs ne peuvent en aucun cas être placés en fin de phrase, et ce quelle que soit leur fonction, argumentale (sujet, objet direct or indirect) ou adverbiale. Ceci permet de supposer que, étant donné que de nombreuses études considèrent les interrogatifs comme des termes focalisés par essence, la position 'fin de phrase' ne peut jamais faire l'objet d'un processus de focalisation dans la langue ||gana.

Mots clés

Khoïsan, SOV, ordre des mots variable, interrogatifs argumentaux /
adverbiaux, marque de PGN (Personne, Genre, Nombre).
# 1. Introduction

The purpose of this paper is to describe question formation in |Gana. |Gana is classified as a Central Khoesan language of the Western branch (Güldemann & Vossen 2000). It is spoken in the following areas in Botswana: Central Kalahari Game Reserve (CKGR), New Xade, Xere, and Kaudwane. It is closely related to |Gui, which is spoken in areas such as Ghanzi and New Xade. |Gana has not been described as extensively as other Khoesan languages and so it has no standardized orthography. Therefore the orthography adopted in this paper follows the International Phonetic Alphabet (IPA) system.

While it may be the case that |Gana is less studied than other related languages, there exist several publications devoted to various grammatical features of this language. These include Tanaka (1978) who studied the vocabulary of both |Gana and |Gui, Vossen (1997) who provides some phonological, morphological and syntactic data on |Gana. In addition, Vossen also briefly discusses possessive marking in the languages of all three members of the |Gana linguistic subgroup<fnref n="1" /> as well as the overall morphology of these languages (Vossen 2013). In this last work, Vossen provides some examples illustrating how these three languages form questions. For his part, Nakagawa (2008) has done extensive work on the phonetic and phonological structure of |Gui. In his most recent work, he (Nakagawa 2013a) draws parallels between the phonological structures of various dialects of |Gana and |Gui and provides (Nakagawa 2013b) a grammatical sketch of |Gui, in which question formation is dealt with in one paragraph only, due to the concise nature of his publication. Thus, as shown by this literature survey, there really is no detailed study that focuses on question formation in |Gana and as such, this grammatical point remains largely unexplored. It is out of this realization that this paper looks at question formation in |Gana focusing on the following two questions: (a) What forms do question words (henceforth: Q-words or QW in glosses) take in |Gana? (b) Given that |Gana, like many Central Khoesan languages has flexible word order at clause level, what positions do Q-words take in the language and what are the resulting word orders in interrogative sentences? The rest of the paper is organized as follows: section 2 describes the methodology used for data collection while section 3 provides some relevant background information on |Gana. Section 4 establishes the forms of Q-words in |Gana and section 5 describes word order in content and adjunct questions. Section 6 provides the conclusion of this study.

<footnote n="1">1. Vossen (2013) classifies |Gana, |Gui and †Haba as belonging to the same linguistic subgroup which he refers to as the |Gana subgroup since they share similar phonological, morphological, syntactic and lexical characteristics.</footnote>
## 2. Methodology of data collection

The data described in this paper was collected in 2012 between the months of September and October during a field investigation visit to New Xade. The data were collected from eight language consultants: four males and four females. Six of the consultants were aged between 23 and 28 while two were aged 60+. The two older consultants speak mainly |Gana as a first language and Shekalahari (the regional language) as a second language; they pointed out that they also can speak Setswana (the national language) although not as well as |Gana or Shekalahari. The six younger consultants speak |Gana, Shekalahari, Setswana and English since all six have received high school education (which is given in English in Botswana).

The method of data collection was mainly based on elicitation. Although this method has a major limitation namely that it lacks the naturalness of language in context, it nevertheless provides the investigator with an opportunity to target and obtain specific grammatical structures such as interrogative sentences. The consultants were divided into two groups of four people each; each group comprised of one of the ederly consultants. The elderly informants were needed particularly in cases where the younger ones were unsure about a structure and its use. The languages used for elicitation were mainly Setswana and English, and the younger consultants translated the structures into |Gana for the senior consultants.

## 3. Some background information on |Gana

Before engaging in a description of |Gana, it is worthwhile to provide the reader with some background information on the language, as it is relevant to the topic of question formation. This information includes clausal word order and the marking of Person, Gender and Number (PGN).

### 3.1 Word order

Like other Central Khoesan languages such as Nama (Haacke 2006, den Besten 2002) and Naro (Visser 2010), the basic word order of |Gana is S(ubject) O(bject) V(erb). Consider the examples below<fnref n="2" />:

<table><tr><td>(1a)</td><td>‡úu|ʰě-bè</td><td>dábè</td><td>l’aí</td><td>ã-hã</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>‡úu|ʰě-3M.SG.NOM</td><td>salt</td><td>buy</td><td>JNCT-PST</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>S</td><td>O</td><td>V</td><td>(TM)</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>‘‡úu|ʰě bought salt.’</td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr></table>

<footnote n="2">2. Abbreviations: F = Feminine, FUT = Future, JNCT = Juncture morpheme, M = Masculine, N = Neuter, O<sub>d</sub> = direct Object, O<sub>t</sub> = indirect Object, OBL = Oblique, PGN = Person, Gender & Number marker, PL = Plural, PRS = Present Tense, PST = Past Tense, QW = Question Word, SG = Singular, TM = Time Marker.</footnote>
(1b) dábè |†úul|ʰě-bè |l’àí ã-hã
salt |†úul|ʰě-3M.SG.NOM buy JNCT-PST
O S V (TM)
‘|†úul|ʰě bought salt.’

(1c) l’àí ã-hã |†úul|ʰě-bè |dábè
buy JNCT-PST |†úul|ʰě-3M.SG.NOM salt
V (TM) S O
‘|†úul|ʰě bought salt.’

Example (1a) displays the SOV word order which, according to the consultants, is pragmatically the dominant word order in |Gana (see Ono 2010 for a similar observation in |Gui, Visser 2010 for Naro)<fnref n="3" />. However, other word orders are possible in the language as shown in examples (1b, 1c). Indeed, |Gana, like other Central Khoesan languages e.g. Nama (Haacke 2006), Naro (Trail 1994, Barnard 1985) and Khwe (Kilian-Hatz 2009), has a flexible word order. However, such flexibility seems to be determined by pragmatic considerations and not the category at hand (see also Haacke (2006), Kilian-Hatz (2009) for similar observations regarding Nama and Khwe respectively). Example (1a) with a SOV word order is the most prevalent and preferred in answer to the question ‘What did |†úul|ʰě buy?’; example (1b) is preferred as an answer to the question ‘What is it that |†úul|ʰě bought?’, while example (1c) would be preferred in response to the question ‘What did |†úul|ʰě do?’ From these three examples, we can infer that, in |Gana the sentence initial position is reserved for focused or emphasized material.

## 3.2 Person, Gender and Number (PGN) Marking

The grammatical features of gender and number play an important role in the grammar of |Gana as is the case in other Central Khoesan languages (Güldemann & Vossen 2000). This observation has also been made for other Khoesan languages such as Naro (Vossen 1986, Visser 2010), Nama (Hagman 1977), |Gui (Ono 2010) and Khwe (Kilian-Hatz & Heine (2010). |Gana makes three gender distinctions namely masculine, feminine and neuter, and nouns are usually marked for person, gender and number just like in other Khoesan languages (Kilian-Hatz & Heine 2010). This is illustrated in the examples below.

(2a) |†úul|ʰě-bè k'yú k'yú: Néò-sà mú
|†úul|ʰě-3M.SG.NOM PST yesterday Neo-3F.SG.OBL see
‘|†úul|ʰě saw Neo yesterday’.

(2b) Néò-sè k'yú k'yú: |àmkhwé-bà mú
Neo-3F.SG.NOM PST yesterday |àmkhwé-3M.SG.OBL see
‘Neo saw |àmkhwé yesterday’.

<footnote n="3">³ I have glossed the morpheme ã which occurs before the past tense marker as ‘juncture’. However, I have not investigated this phenomenon in detail. For a discussion of this phenomenon, the reader is referred to Vossen (2013).</footnote>
<table><tr><td>(2c) Néò-sè</td><td>k'yú Khóé-è</td><td>mú</td><td>ágwà</td></tr><tr><td>Neo-3F.SG.NOM PST</td><td>Person-3N</td><td>see</td><td>there</td></tr><tr><td colspan="4">'Neo saw a person there'.</td></tr></table>

In examples (2a) the subject noun **úu** is third person singular and masculine and the PGN marker is *bè* (sometimes **-m** in non-nominative positions) while in (2b) the PGN marker on the noun is *sè* because the noun is third person singular feminine. In (2c) the person is of unknown gender and so a gender neutral PGN marker *è* is used. Another thing of interest to note with regards to these examples is that (i) the PGN marker of a noun in nominative position is suffixed with **-è** as observed in both (2a) and (2b) and that (ii) the PGN marker of non-nominative nouns (referred to in the literature as oblique (Witzlack-Makaravitch 2006, Haacke 1976)) is suffixed with **-à** as observed in the same examples. From these examples, we can conclude that PGN markers do not just indicate the person, gender and number of a given noun or noun phrase in ||Gana; they also mark a grammatical distinction between nominative and oblique case. With this short background information in place, I now turn the discussion to the topic of question formation in ||Gana.

## 4. The form of Q-words in ||Gana

||Gana has two basic morphemes máá- and **nùú** which are used to produce content questions. Although Vossen (2013) lists three interrogative words máá- ‘who’ **nùú** ‘what’ and **di** ‘which’ for ||Gana, the form **di** did not surface in the data analyzed in this paper, except as a possessive marker (see e.g. (4) below). Rather, what surfaced is **hí-** a form used specifically to form Q-words in sentences in which the gender of the questioned entity is unknown but human (see below). Nakagawa reports that ||Gui has two basic forms for Q-words, namely máã ‘how/which’ and **ììxo** ‘what’. The basic morphemes máá- and **nùú** in ||Gana take relevant gender markings (see Vossen 2013 for a similar observation) and sometimes specific affixes to form different content word questions as will be illustrated below. Before I illustrate the ||Gana Q-words, let me point out that another question presents itself here: given that word order is quite flexible in ||Gana, and that there are two basic Q-words, máá- and **nùú**, how do native speakers know the argumental role (i.e. subject or object) of what is being questioned? The answer to this question will reveal itself in the next sub-section, in which I illustrate how ||Gana forms content questions from these basic forms beginning with máá.

### 4.1 máá

Máá- occurs in most content questions including both argument questions (that is those which question the subject, the direct object, the indirect object) and most adjunct questions, that is ‘where, ‘when’ and ‘how’. I first look at argument questions before moving on to adjunct questions.
### 4.1.1 máá in argument questions

#### 4.1.1.1 General case

(3a) Máá-bè dábè l'áí ã-hã
QW-3M. SG.NOM salt buy JNCT.PST
'Who bought salt?' (the buyer is expected to be a male.)

(3b) Máá àbā-è |ʰāā ts'ā ã-hà
QW dog-N meat steal JNCT-PST
'Which dog stole the meat?

(4a) Máá-m (dì-s) ngibí John-bè k
QW-3M.SG.OBL POSS-3F.SG axe John-3M.SG.NOM PST
ts'ã
steal
'Whose axe did John steal?'

(4b) Ngibí máá-mdì John-bè k yú ts'ã
axeQW-3M.SG.OBL POSS John-3M.SG.NOM PST steal
'Whose axe did John steal?'

In (3a) the subject of the sentence is questioned and the form máá is used to mean ‘who’; as this form is gender marked with the morpheme bè which marks the masculine gender, the buyer is expected to be male. In (3b), although the gender of the questioned dog is not marked directly on the Q-word, it is nevertheless indicated as è, a gender neutral marker showing that the gender of this dog is unknown. In (3b), máá means ‘which’ while in example (4a), máá corresponds more closely to English ‘whose’. The questioned object is in the possessive form and the gender of the possessor is masculine as indicated by the morpheme -m. Vossen (2013) reports that in possessive contexts, interrogatives are followed by the possessive marker dì in |Gana as illustrated in example (5). Although it might be the case that the possessive is usually marked using the possessive marker dì in many Central Khoesan languages as noted in Vossen (2013), and as in the examples in (4) above, the data reported in this paper reveals that the possessive marker dì in |Gana is used obligatorily only when the possessed noun occurs phrase initially in interrogative possessive syntactic structures. In fact, Vossen’s example (431a) reported below as (5) confirms this. If on the other hand, the interrogative possessive determiner occurs phrase initially as in (4a), then the possessive marker dì is optional.

(5) Kx'áo-dzè má.xà-lù di? (Vossen 2013 : Ex. 431a)
Arrow-F.PL who?-M.PL POSS
'Whose arrows are these ?'

Next, let us consider (6-7) below. In (6), máá- is used to question a direct object and it can be marked with a feminine PGN oblique marker sà (6a) or a masculine PGN oblique marker bà (6b). In (7) máá- is used
to question the indirect object (recipiendaary) and it can also be marked for masculine in (7a) or feminine in (7b). In fact, examples (3) to (7) show that in |Gana, the same PGN markers used with nouns (2a-c) can also combine with máá, thus distinguishing nominative from oblique case for this question word as well. Examples (6c) and (7c) are ungrammatical because the PGN marker of the Q-word which assumes the function of an object, is inflected for nominative case instead of oblique case.

(6a) Màà-sà !ààsá-sè kā mú?
QW-3F.SG.OBL !ààsá-3F.SG.NOM PST see?
‘Who did Qààsá see?’

(6b) Màà-bà !ààsá-sè kā mú?
QW-3M.SG.OBL !ààsá-3F.SG.NOM PST see?
‘Who did Qààsá see?’

(6c) *Màà-sè !ààsá-sè kā mú?
QW-3F.SG.OBL !ààsá-3F.SG.NOM PST see?
*’Who did Qààsá see?’

(7a) Máá-bà kỳè k'yú dábè màà ã-hã
QW-3M.SG.OBL 1SG.NOM PST salt give JNCT.PST
‘Who did I give salt to?’

(7b) Máá-sà kỳè k'yú dábè màà ã-hã
QW-3F.SG.OBL 1SG.NOM PST salt give JNCT.PST
‘Who did I give salt to?’

(7c) *Máá-bè kỳè k'yú dábè màà ã-hã
QW-3M.SG.NOM 1SG.NOM PST salt give JNCT.PST
*’Who did I give salt to?’

### 4.1.1.2 The gender neutral suppletive form *hí*

Besides máá, |Gana also has a suppletive basic form *hí*, used with a gender neutral value (i.e. when the gender of the questioned person is unknown) corresponding to the English interrogative ‘who’ – |Gana *hí-r-èè* (subject) / *hí-r-àà* (oblique)– and ‘whose’ –|Gana *hí-n*:

(8a) Hí-r-èè dábè l'àí ã-hã
QW.N-who-NOM salt buy JNCT-PST
‘Who bought salt?’

(8b) *Hí-n dábè l'àí ã-hã
QW.N-whose salt buy JNCT-PST
*’Who bought salt?’
(This is unacceptable with the meaning ‘Who bought salt.’)

(8c) Hí-r-àà John-bè kā mú?
QW.N-who-OBL john-3m.sg.nom PST see
‘Who did John see?’

(9a) Hí-n àbā-sè |hʻāā'-sa ts'ã ã-hà
QW.N-whose dog-3f.sg.nom meat-3f.sg.obl steal JNCT-PST
‘Whose dog stole the meat?’
(9b) *Hí-r-èè àbā-sè |ʰ’āā-sa ts’ã ã-hà
QW.N-who-NOM dog-3F.SG.NOM meat-3F.SG.OBL steal
JNCT-PST

*‘Whose dog stole the meat?’

From the examples above, we can see that *hí-* takes two different endings, -r-èè/àà to mean ‘who’ as shown in examples (8a&8c) and -n to mean ‘whose’ as in example (9a). The unacceptable example (8b) shows that *hí-n* cannot mean ‘who’. Conversely, the ungrammatical (9b) shows that *hí-r-èè* cannot mean ‘whose’.

### 4.1.2 máá in adjunct questions ('when', 'where' and 'how')

Máá combines with different morphemes to form adjunct question words corresponding to English ‘when’, ‘where’ and ‘how’. Thus, when combined with the morpheme -kàm (10) máá corresponds to English ‘when’. When it takes the morpheme -zà (11), the meaning that obtains is ‘where’. Máá can also combine with g’úm (12) to produce a question word meaning ‘how’. However, máá is not used to form the question word corresponding to English ‘why’, which is derived from another basic form, namely *nùú* (see below).

(10) [Máà-kàm] ♀úulʰě-bè béè l’àí ã-hã
QW-when ♀úulʰě-3M.SG.NOM cow buy JNCT-PST
‘When did ♀úulʰě buy a cow?’

(11) [Máá-zà] ♀úulʰě-bè béè l’àí ã-hã
QW-where ♀úulʰě-3M.SG.NOM cow buy JNCT-PST
‘Where did ♀úulʰě buy a cow?’

(12) [Màà-g’úm] ♀úulʰě-bè |ʰ’āā n|wà ã-hã
QW-how ♀úulʰě-3M.SG.NOM meat cook JNCT-PST
‘How did ♀úulʰě cook the meat?’

### 4.2 *nùú*

The question word corresponding to English ‘what’ is *nùú* in Gana. It is always associated with the feminine gender marker -sè (nominative) /sà (oblique), independently of the expected gender (whether masculine or feminine) of the noun in the answer. Thus in example (13a) the thing that broke the calabash can be feminine or masculine. What is described here is perhaps similar to an observation made in relation to Naro by Barnard (1985), who says that in that language, the feminine PGN marker semantically becomes neutral. However, notice that if the PGN form -sma (13b) is used, then the questioned entity is unambiguously feminine. When the gender of the questioned entity is unknown, the question word *nùú* takes the gender neutral marking è as shown in (13c).
(13a) Nùú-sè
‡ābā nà-há?
QW-3F.SG.NOM calabash break JNCT-PST
‘What broke the calabash?’
(The thing that broke the calabash is either feminine or masculine.)

(13b) Nùú-smà
‡ābā nà-há?
QW-3F.SG calabash break JNCT-PST
‘What broke the calabash?’
(The thing that broke the calabash can only be feminine.)

(13c) Nùú-è
‡ābā nà-há?
QW-N calabash break JNCT-PST
‘What broke the calabash?’

(13d) *Nùú-sà
‡ābā nà-há?
QW-3F.SG.NOM calabash break JNCT-PST
*‘What broke the calabash?’
(The thing that broke the calabash is either feminine or masculine.)

Just like for máá, the PGN marker affixed on the question morpheme nùú distinguishes nominative and oblique cases. For example, notice that in example (13a) where the questioned element is a subject, the PGN marker takes the -è suffix while the –à suffix is disallowed as shown by the ungrammatical (13d). In examples (14-15) where nùú questions the direct object (14a-b) and the indirect object (15a-b) respectively, the suffix on the PGN marker is -à which indicates oblique case while -è is disallowed as shown by the ungrammatical (14c&15c).

(14a) úulhˇě-bè nùú-sá
l’àí ã-hã
‡úulhˇě-3M.SG.NOM QW-3F.SG.OBL buy JNCT-PST
‘What did úulhˇě buy?’

(14b) Nùú-sá
l’àí ã-hã
QW-3F.SG úulhˇě-3M.SG.NOM buy JNCT-PST
‘What did úulhˇě buy?’

(14c) *Nùú- sè
l’àí ã-hã
QW-3F.SG.NOM úulhˇě-3M.SG.NOM buy JNCT-PST
*‘What did úulhˇě buy?’

(15a) Kyè nùú-sá
àbā-sá màà ã-hã
1SG QW-3F.SG.OBL dog-3F.SG.OBL give JNCT-PST
‘What did I give to the dog?’

(15b) Nùú-sá
kγè àbā-sá màà ã-hã
QW-3F.SG.OBL 1SG.NOM dog-3F.SG.OBL give JNCT-PST
‘What did I give to the dog?’

(15c) *Nùú-sè kγè àbā-sá màà ã-hã
QW-3F.SG.OBL 1SG.NOM dog-3F.SG.OBL give JNCT-PST
*‘What did I give to the dog?’

Nùú-(sá) also appears as the basic morpheme used to produce the
||Gana question word corresponding to English ‘why’, through the addi-
tion of the morpheme *kʷè-kà* as shown in (16).

(16) [Nùú-(sá)-kʷè-kà] ḫúuḥě-be béè ||'àí à-hã
QW ḫúuḥě-3M.SG.NOM cow buy JNCT-PST
'Why did ḫúuḥě buy a cow?'

It is not surprising that the basic form of the word meaning ‘why’ in
‖Gana is *nùú–(sá)* ‘what’ as *nùú–(sá)-kʷè-kà* ‘why’ is in essence a shorte-
ned form of a phrase meaning ‘*what* is the reason that something happe-
ned’. Bleek (1928) observed that the word for ‘why’ in Naro is *du:ʃ-kwe*
(a noun phrase) meaning ‘for what reason’. Collins & Namaseb (2011)
also note that in N|uuki (another Khoesan language) ‘why’ questions can
be formed by moving the word *cui* ‘what’ to the front of the sentence.
Similarly, in Ikalanga, a Bantu language, the word for ‘what’ and ‘why’
is *ini*, and it is the context that disambiguates the intended meaning
(Letsholo 2011).

4.3 Summary

In summary, |Gana has two basic forms used to form content questions: *máá* (humans) and *nùú* (non-humans) and a suppletive gender neutral question word *hi-* which is used only in reference to humans. As illustrated above (8-9), *hi-* can be suffixed with –*r-èè/àà* to produce a question word corresponding to English ‘who’ or with –*n-* to produce a question word corresponding to English ‘whose’. The discussion above answers the question asked at the beginning of this section, namely, ‘How do native speakers know the argumental role (i.e. subject or object) of what is being questioned ?’ The answer lies in that not only does the PGN marker carry information about person, gender and number, it also makes a distinction between nominative and oblique case. Table 1 below is a summary of the different question words in |Gana.

<table><caption>Table 1. Question words in |Gana</caption><thead><tr><th>Q-word</th><th>F</th><th>M</th><th>N</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>Who/whose/whom/which</td><td>máá-sà/sè</td><td>máá-bà/è/m</td><td>hí-r-èè/àà ~ hí-n= (used with humans only)</td></tr><tr><td>what</td><td>nùú-sè/sá/smà</td><td>nùú-sè/sá</td><td>nùú-è</td></tr><tr><td>when</td><td></td><td></td><td>máá-kàm</td></tr><tr><td>where</td><td></td><td></td><td>máá-zà</td></tr><tr><td>how</td><td></td><td></td><td>màà-gyúm</td></tr><tr><td>why</td><td></td><td></td><td>nùú-sá-k'yè-kà</td></tr></tbody></table>
## 5. The position of question words in II Gana

The question we address in this sub-section is ‘What position(s) do question words occupy in II Gana and what are the possible word orders in interrogative sentences?’ In order to answer these questions accurately, question words must be investigated according to the different functions they assume, i.e. subject, both direct and indirect object, and adjunct. I begin by looking at subject questions.

### 5.1 Subject question words

There are two positions that a subject question word can occupy: (i) the *in-situ* position, that is when the question word occupies the position that is usually occupied by the subject in a declarative sentence with an SOV structure (17a); (ii) the question word can also occur after a fronted object (17b). Example (17c) where the verb is fronted and the question word is in sentence final position is disallowed. Thus in terms of word order, when the question word is the subject, interrogative sentences involving transitive verbs have the word orders SOV and OSV while VOS is disallowed.

(17a) Màà-sè !ààsá-sà mú? QW-3F.SG.NOM !ààsá-3F.SG.OBL see Q ‘Who saw Qààsá?’ (SOV)

(17b) !ààsá-sà màà-sè mú? !ààsá-3F.SG.OBL QW-3F.SG.NOM see O Q ‘Who saw Qààsá?’ (OSV)

(17c) *mú-s !ààsá-sà màà-sè See-3F.SG !ààsá-3F.SG.OBL QW-3F.SG.NOM V O Q *‘Who saw Qààsá?’ (VOS)

### 5.2 Direct object question words

Direct object question words can occur in two different places: (i) the question word can be fronted as in many languages of the world (18a) or (ii) it can stay *in-situ* as shown in (18b) in consonance with the fact that II Gana is an SOV language. However, the question word cannot occur in a sentence final position as shown by the ungrammaticality of (18c-18d).

(18a) Màà-sà !ààsá-sè kā mú? QW-3F.SG.OBL !ààsá-3F.SG.NOM PST see? Q S (TM) V ‘Who did Qààsá see?’ (OSV)

(18b) !ààsá-sè kā màà-sà mú! !ààsá-3F.SG.NOM PST QW-3F.SG.OBL see S (TM) Q V
‘Who did Qààsá see?’ (SOV)

(18c) *mú-s !ààsá-sè kā màà-sà
See-3F.SG !ààsá-3F.SG.NOM PST QW-3F.SG.NOM
V S (TM) Q

*’Who did Qààsá see?’ (VSO)

(18d) *!ààsá-sè kā mú màà-sà
!ààsá-3F.SG.NOM PST see QW-3F.SG.OBL
S (TM) V Q

*‘Who did Qààsá see?’ (SVO)

(18d) provides compelling evidence that question words are disallowed in sentence final position in |Gana. Indeed, if one considered the ungrammaticality of (18c) alone, one could come to the conclusion that the fronting of the verb may be what makes this example ungrammatical. However, the ungrammaticality of (18d) confirms that it is the occurrence of the Q-word in sentence final position that renders examples (18c-18d) ungrammatical.

## 5.3 Indirect object question words

The canonical word order in double object constructions in |Gana is SOᵢO₉V. This is illustrated in example (19a) below. However, because word order is rather flexible in |Gana, it is also possible to have the direct object preceding the indirect object as shown in (19b).

(19a) K'è k'ú !ààsá-sà dábè màà
1SG.NOM PST !ààsá-3F.SG.OBL salt give
S (TM) Oᵢ O₉ V

‘I gave Qààsá salt.’ (SOᵢO₉V)

(19b) K'è k'ú dábè !ààsá-sà màà
1SG.NOM PST salt !ààsá-3F.SG.OBL give
S (TM) O₉ Oᵢ V

‘I gave Qààsá salt.’ (SO₉OᵢV)

The flexible word order observed in declarative sentences is also observed in interrogative sentences. From the examples in (20) below, we can see that, when the question word is an indirect object, it can occur sentence initially (20a) (QᵢSO₉V), in second position following a fronted object (20b) (O₉QᵢSV), following the subject (20c) (SQᵢO₉V), that is in *situ*, as this is the canonical word order in declarative sentences in this language. The question word can also follow both the subject and the direct object (20d) (SO₉QᵢV) in double object constructions. Both (20e-f) are ungrammatical and in both examples the question word is sentence final, providing further evidence for the claim that question words are disallowed in sentence final position in |Gana (see section 5.2 above). Further evidence that the ungrammaticality of these examples is brought about by the position of the question word and not the position of the verb comes from the fact that we saw in section 3 (1c) that verbs can
occur sentence initially in this language. In addition, we also noted in
section 3 that focused or emphasized elements occur sentence initially in
‖Gana, a position that as we have seen, question words can occupy in this
language. Question words are said to be focused in the literature (Büring
2007, Bresnan & Mchombo 1987) and the fact that they cannot occur in
sentence-final position suggests that this is not a focus position in this
language.

(20a) Máá-sà kỳè kỳú dábè màà
QW-3F.SG.OBL 1SG.NOM PST salt give
Qᵢ S (TM) O_d V
‘Who did I give salt to?’ (QᵢSO_dV)

(20b) Dábè-sà máá-sà kỳè kỳú màà
salt-3F.SG.OBL QW-3F.SG.OBL 1SG.NOM PST give
O_d Qᵢ S (TM) V
‘Who did I give salt to?’ (feminine) (O_dQᵢSV)

(20c) Kỳè kỳú máá-sà dábè màà
1SG.NOM PST QW-3F.SG.OBL salt give
S (TM) Qᵢ O_d V
‘Who did I give salt to?’ (feminine) (SQ_dO_dV)

(20d) Kỳè kỳú máá-sà dábè màà
1SG.NOM PST salt QW-3F.SG.OBL give
S (TM) O_d Qᵢ V
‘Who did I give salt to?’ (feminine) (SO_dQᵢV)

(20e) *Màà kỳè kỳú dábè máá-sà
give 1SG.NOM PST salt QW-3F.SG.OBL
V S (TM) O_d Qᵢ
*‘Who did I give salt to?’ (VSO_dQᵢ)

(20f) *Kỳè kỳú dábè màà máá-sà
1SG.NOM PST salt give QW-3F.SG.OBL
S (TM) O_d V Qᵢ
‘Who did I give salt to?’ (SO_dVQᵢ)

The behaviour described above is applicable to all question words that is, those formed with máá- as well as those formed with *nùú*. Thus, due to limitations of space, I do not discuss examples involving *nùú*.

5.4 Adjunct question words

Adjunct question words, that is *nùú-sá-kỳè-kà* ‘why’, *máá-zà* ‘where’, *màà-gỳúm* ‘how’ and *máà-kàm* ‘when’ occupy similar positions as those occupied by the subject, direct and indirect object question words. To save space, I shall not provide examples illustrating all of these positions for each of the adjunct question words but rather illustrate each position using each of these adjuncts in turn. For example, in (21a), the question word is sentence initial. In (22a) the question word occurs immediately after the subject while in (23a) the question word occurs immediately
after a fronted object. In (24a) just as in (21a), the question word occurs sentence initially. In all the (b) examples, the question word occurs sentence finally and these sentences are ungrammatical, which is consistent with the findings made in previous sections for subject, object and indirect object question words.

## Why

(21a) [Nùú -sà-kỳè-kà] †úulhě-bè bèè l’àíã-hã
QW.why †úulhě-3M.SG.NOM cow buy JNCT-PST
Q S O V (TM)
‘Why did †úulhě buy a cow?’ (QSOV)

(21b) * †úulhě-bè bèè l’àí ã-hã [nùú-sá-kỳè-kà]
†úulhě-3M.SG.NOM cow buy JNCT-PST QW.why
S O V (TM) Q
*‘Why did †úulhě buy a cow?’ (SOVQ)

## Where

(22a) †úulhě-bè máá-zà bèè l’àí ã-hã
†úulhě-3M.SG.NOM QWwhere cow buy JNCT-PST
S Q O V (TM)
‘Where did †úulhě buy a cow?’ (SQOV)

(22b) * †úulhě-bè bèè l’àí ã-hã máá-zà
†úulhě-3M.SG.NOM cow buy JNCT-PST QWwhere
S O V (TM) Q
*‘Where did †úulhě buy a cow?’ (SOVQ)

## How

(23a) |h’āā [màà-gỳúm] †úulhě-bè n|wà ã-hã
meat QW.how †úulhě-3M.SG.NOM cook JNCT-PST
O Q S V (TM)
‘How did †úulhě cook the meat?’ (OQSV)

(23b) * †úulhě-bè |h’āā n|wà ã-hã [màà-gỳúm]
†úulhě-3M.SG.NOM meat cook JNCT-PST QW.how
S O V (TM) Q
*‘How did †úulhě cook the meat?’ (SOVQ)

## When

(24a) [màà-kàm] †úulhě-bè bèè l’àí ã-hã
QW when †úulhě-3M.SG.NOM cow buy JNCT-PST
Q S O V (TM)
‘When did †úulhě buy a cow?’ (QSOV)

(24b) *†úulhě-bè bèè l’àí ã-hã [màà-kàm]
†úulhě-3M.SG.NOM cow buy JNCT-PST QW when
S O V (TM) Q
*‘When did †úulhě buy a cow?’ (SOVQ)
## 5.5 Summary

From the data above, we can conclude that the question words in ‖Gana mainly occupy three different positions in a sentence: (i) sentence initial (Den Besten (2002) observes that the question word targets a sentence initial position in Nama while Nakagawa (2013b) notes that in ‖Gui question words optionally occur sentence initially), (ii) immediately after the subject of the sentence, (iii) immediately after a fronted object. In double object constructions, the indirect object question word may also occupy the positions delineated above but it can also follow both the subject and direct object. The one position that question words can clearly not occupy in ‖Gana is the sentence final position. Table 2 provides a summary of the different positions that question words can occupy in ‖Gánà.

<table><caption>Table 2. Positions occupied by question words in ‖Gana</caption><thead><tr><th>Q-word</th><th>Sentence initial</th><th>Following subject</th><th>Following fronted object</th><th>Following subject &amp; direct object<sup>4</sup></th><th>Sentence final</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>máá-bè/sè 'who'</td><td>√</td><td>√ (does not apply to subject questions)</td><td>√</td><td>√</td><td>X</td></tr><tr><td>nùú-sè/smà 'what'</td><td>√</td><td>√</td><td>√</td><td>√</td><td>X</td></tr><tr><td>nùú-sá-k'yè-kà 'why'</td><td>√</td><td>√</td><td>√</td><td>N/A</td><td>X</td></tr><tr><td>máá-zà 'where'</td><td>√</td><td>√</td><td>√</td><td>N/A</td><td>X</td></tr><tr><td>màà-g'yúm 'how'</td><td>√</td><td>√</td><td>√</td><td>N/A</td><td>X</td></tr><tr><td>máá-kàm 'when'</td><td>√</td><td>√</td><td>√</td><td>N/A</td><td>X</td></tr></tbody></table>

## 6. Conclusion

This paper set out to describe question formation in ‖Gana. The paper specifically investigated two main questions, namely (a) What are the different question words that ‖Gana uses to form content questions? and (b) What positions do these question words occupy in this language and what are the resulting word orders in interrogative sentences?

<footnote n="4">4. Applies to indirect object question words only.</footnote>
Regarding question (a), we determined that |Gana has two basic forms used to produce content questions: these are máá (humans) and *nùú* (non-humans). In addition, máá- has a suppletive form hi- which is used specifically with reference to humans when the gender of the questioned person is unknown. Máá corresponds basically to English ‘who’, which, ‘whose’ and ‘whom’, and it can be inflected for gender. It is also the basic form used to derive the adjunct question words ‘where’, ‘how’ and ‘when’. As for *nùú* it basically corresponds to English ‘what’ and can also be used to produce the question word corresponding to English ‘why’.

Our finding regarding question (b) is that, in basic transitive sentences, question words may occupy three main positions in |Gana: (i) sentence initially, (ii) immediately after the subject of the sentence (SQV), (iii) immediately after a fronted object (QSV). In double object constructions, when the question word is the indirect object, it can also occur sentence initially (QᵢSOV), immediately after the subject (SQᵢO<sub>d</sub>V), after a fronted object (O<sub>d</sub>QᵢSV) and after both the subject and direct object (SO<sub>d</sub>QᵢV) as well. Adjunct Q-words occur in the same positions as direct object Q-words. An interesting finding is that Q-words never occur in sentence final position in |Gana irrespective of whether the question word is an argument of the verb (subject, direct or indirect object) or an adjunct. The observation that question words are not permitted sentence finally in |Gana suggests that the sentence final position is not a focus position in this language. This claim calls for further investigation.

## References

Barnard, Alan. 1985. A Nharo Word List with Notes on Grammar. *Occasional Publications No. 2. Department of African Studies*, Durban: University of Natal.

Bleek, D. F. 1928. *The Naron: A Bushman Tribe of the Central Kalahari*. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Bresnan, Joan and Sam Mchombo. 1987. Topic, pronoun and agreement in Chinese. *Language*, Vol. 63/4, 741-782.

Büring, Daniel. 2007. Semantics, intonation and information structure. In: Zimmerman, Malte & Féry, Caroline (eds.), *Information Structure*. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 177-205.

Collins, Chris and Levi Namaseb. 2011. *A Grammatical Sketch of N|uuki* [*Research in Khoisan Studies Vol 25*]. Köln: Köppe.

Den Besten, Hans. 2002. *Journal of Germanic Linguistics*, 14/1, 3-56.

Güldemann, Tom and Rainer Vossen. 2000. Khoisan. In: Heine, Bernd and Nurse, Derek (eds.), *African Languages: An Introduction*. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 99-122.

Haacke, W. H. G. 2006. Syntactic focus marking in Khoekhoe (Nama/Damara). In: Fieldler, Ines and Schwartz, Anne (eds.). *Papers on information structure in African languages - ZAS Papers in Linguistics* 46, 105-127.
Haacke, William. H. G. 1976. *A Nama Grammar: The Noun Phrase*. [M.A. Thesis]. University of Cape Town (Dep. of African Languages).

Hagman, R. S. 1977. *Nama Hottentot Grammar*. [Language Science Monographs Vol 15]. Bloomington: Indiana University Publications.

Killian-Hatz, Christa and Heine, Bernd. 2010. (revised version). On nominal gender marking in Khwe. *Khoisan Forum* 1, 1-25 (online).

Killian-Hatz, Christa. 2009. Khwe. In: Dimmendaal, Gerrit (ed.), *Coding Participant Marking: Construction Types in Twelve African Languages*. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: Benjamins, 215-237.

Letsholor, Rose (2011) The syntactic distribution of adjunct WH phrases in Ikalanga. *JALL*, 32, 219-250.

Nakagawa, Hirosi. 2013a. Phonetics and phonology: Gana subgroup. In: Vossen, Rainer (ed.), *The Khoesan Languages. Routledge Language Family Series*. Oxford: Routledge, 64-71.

Nakagawa, Hirosi. 2013b. Syntax: Gana subgroup. In: Vossen, Rainer (ed.). *The Khoesan Languages*. Oxford: Routledge, 394-401.

Nakagawa, Hirosi. 2008. *Aspects of the phonetic and phonological structure of the G/ui language*. (online).

Ono, Hitomi. 2010. Gui kinship verbs? Verbs and nouns in Gui and linguistic differences found among its kinship terms. In: Brezinger, Mathias and König, Christa (eds.), *Khoisan Languages and Linguistics* [Proceedings of the 1st International Symposium. January 4-8, 2003, Riezlern / Kleinwalsertal]. Köln: Köppe, 251-283.

Tanaka, Jiro. 1978. *A San Vocabulary of the Central Kalahari: G//ana and G/wi Dialects*. Tokyo: Institute for the Study of Languages and Cultures of Asia and Africa.

Trail, Anthony. 1994. *Linguistic Research on Khoesan Languages*. Gaborone: University of Botswana.

Visser, Hessel. 2010. Verbal compounds in Naro. In: Brezinger, Mathias and König, Christa (eds.), *Khoisan Languages and Linguistics* [Proceedings of the 1st International Symposium. January 4-8, 2003, Riezlern / Kleinwalsertal]. Köln: Köppe, 176-200.

Vossen, Rainer. 2013. Morphology: Gana subgroup. In: Vossen, Rainer (ed.), *The Khoesan Languages. Routledge Language Family Series*. Oxford: Routledge, 207-214.

Vossen, Rainer. 1997. *Die Khoe-Sprachen: Ein Beitrag zur Erforschung der Sprachegeschichte Afrikas* (Quellen zur Khoisan-Forschung Bd. 12). Köln: Köppe.

Vossen, Rainer. 1986. Some observation on nominal gender in Naro. In: Rottland, Franz (ed.). *Festschrift Zum 60 Geburtstag von Carl F. Hoffman*. Hamburg: Helmut Buske, 375-390.

Witzlack-Makarevich, Alena. 2006. *Aspects of Information Structure in Richtersveld Nama* [M.A. Thesis]. Leipzig: Universität Leipzig (Philologische Fakultät Institut für Linguistik).