DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.15730440
title: Comparative auxiliary spreadsheet for Southern Bantu languages

description: This spreadsheet contains information extracted from descriptive grammars, theoretically oriented articles, doctoral and MA theses, dictionaries, and, in a few cases, research fieldnotes. 

 

We include almost everything described as an auxiliary or “deficient verb” in the literature, excluding only a few items that seemed to us to be straightforwardly lexical and those that seemed to serve functions other than auxiliaries (e.g. conjunctions or complementizers, although we included some of these that may also have auxiliary function). We have therefore likely erred on the side of inclusion rather than exclusion.

 

The spreadsheet is meant as a research tool rather than an analysis in itself. While we have tried to be careful and relatively consistent, there will inevitably be some inconsistencies in our notation and possibly misinterpretations of the source material, especially given that some auxiliary functions may not be straightforwardly translatable into English. It should also be seen as a living document, which we hope to update as more information becomes available, and which we hope others will use as an aid and inspiration to more in-depth research.

 

A note on orthography: we have generally (barring typos or inadvertent omissions of diacritic markings) followed the orthographic conventions of the source material, which itself uses a range of orthographic practices, many of which are not transparent to those unfamiliar with the languages in question. Southern Bantu languages typically have extensive consonant inventories, including several series of click consonants in Nguni languages and Sesotho (Southern Sotho).Click consonants are generally represented in the orthographies as c (dental click /ǀ/), q (alveolar click /ǃ/), and x (lateral click /ǁ/), with surrounding consonants indicating features such as voice, nasalisation, and aspiration. Other typical consonants of Southern Bantu languages include lateral fricatives, written as hl (voiceless) and dl (voiced), as well as lateral affricates, written as tl (voiceless) and tlh (aspirated). In addition, vowel systems are frequently reduced in the orthographies: for example, in Sesotho, nine phonemic vowels are represented with five graphemes (some sources represent more using diacritics). For explanations of the orthographies used, we refer readers to the original sources referenced; descriptions of modern orthographic conventions can usually be found on the languages’ respective Wikipedia pages. 

 

Description of sheets

·      Aux hosts the main database of auxiliary forms. Some forms are listed twice if the literature describes them as having two or more functions that we judged as distinctive.

·      Prefix from aux includes forms that synchronically appear as prefixes, but are analysed in the literature as auxiliaries and/or are clearly grammaticalized as auxiliaries. Some of these may also appear as non-affixed auxiliaries, but it is our understanding that they are synchronically primarily or exclusively affixes. 

·      Sources and notes lists the sources consulted and their short references in the spreadsheet

·      Language details gives typological information on the languages and varieties included. See Gunnink et al. 2022 for discussion of historical relationships between these languages/varieties.

 

Description of columns in Aux and Prefix from aux sheets, with discussion

·      Cluster allows for sorting by language cluster

·      Guthrie code specifies the language/variety involved

·      Language lists the language/variety. In most cases, the languages are listed using their endonyms (see language details for more information), but the languages called Ndebele are listed as S(outhern) Ndebele, N(orthern) Ndebele, and Ndebele (Zimbabwe) for clarity.

·      Auxiliary lists the auxiliaries as given in the reference works.

·      Source meaning lists the meanings of the auxiliaries’ lexical sources, as given in the reference works or a bilingual dictionary. Occasionally, these are shortened or paraphrased.

·      Core source meaning attempts to synthesize and harmonize the source meanings for comparability (e.g. source > function) and easier sorting. They are a simplification of the meanings listed in the source meaning column and involve some interpretation on our part, and may therefore introduce misleading analyses in some cases, although we have tried to be careful. There may also be some remaining inconsistencies.

·      Meaning / Function of auxiliary notes the auxiliary functions as described in the relevant reference sources, sometimes slightly abbreviated, with differing descriptions noted along with the name or intials of the corresponding authors.

·      Core aux meaning attempts to synthesize and harmonize the auxilary function for comparability (e.g. function > source) and easier sorting. They are a simplification of the meanings listed in the meaning /function of auxiliary  column and involve some interpretation on our part, and may therefore introduce misleading analyses in some cases, although we have tried to be careful. There may also be some remaining inconsistencies.

·      Category (general) is our preliminary assessment of whether the auxiliary primarily expresses time, aspect, polarity, mood, or other meaning (e.g. adverbial, evaluative, etc.), or a combination thereof. It is meant for rough statistical purposes and may not be fully consistent.

·      Category (specific) is our more specific assessment as to the category of the auxiliary’s function. We have tried to be consistent, but some inconsistencies may remain, and because of the uncertainties involved, we do not consider this a definitive analysis, but rather an aid in forming rough generalizations.

·      Followed by… columns have a Y if the auxiliary is described as being followed by that kind of verb form in the literature (in a few cases, we have inferred this information from examples) and is meant for rough statistical and comparative purposes. We have called “situative” (SIT) forms often described as “participial” and combined “consecutive” (or “narrative”) and “subjunctive” forms into one column, as the same auxilairy often takes both forms, depending on its temporal interpretation. See Crane et al. (submitted) for further discussion. The final “followed by” column contains information about the lexical verb’s form as given by the authors of the relevant descriptions.

·      Other notes is our notes (including notes from the reference works) and questions; this column is informal and sometimes notes points of unclarity.

·      Reference lists the source of the auxiliary information. Lexical source information is not always listed here, but references for lexical sources are listed in the general reference list.

·      Reconstruction gives information regarding proposed proto-Bantu reconstructions of the auxiliary sources, based mostly on Bastin et al. (2002) [BLR]. BLR entries include their index number for referential purposes; others are cited according to their source

·      Reconstruction notes contains occasional notes on these reconstructions.

·      Appears more than once (possibly with different meanings depending on following form) is a statistical aid to avoid double counting of auxilairies that may have two distinct functions. A "Y" in this column indicates that the auxiliary form appears twice (possibly with different tense/aspect marking, although this decision, too was subjective) and is reported to have seemingly divergent functions. Whether something is listed in one or two rows (i.e. whether the meanings are considered distinct) is a subjective matter, and risks inconsistency, so the "Y" helps mitigate this issue.

 

References

Bastin, Yvonne, André Coupez, Evariste Mumba & Thilo C. Schadeberg (eds.). 2002. Bantu lexical reconstructions 3. Tervuren: Royal Museum for Central Africa. https://www.africamuseum.be/de/research/discover/human_sciences/culture_society/blr (accessed 19 March 2025).

Gunnink, Hilde, Natalia Chousou-Polydouri & Koen Bostoen. 2022. Divergence and contact in Southern Bantu language and population history: A new phylogeny in cross-disciplinary perspective". Language Dynamics and Change 13(1). 74–131. https://doi.org/10.1163/22105832-bja10022 (accessed 19 March 2025).

 

Sources for spreadsheet entries

Baumbach, Erdmann J. M. 1987. Analytical Tsonga grammar. (Studia Originalia 3). Pretoria: University of South Africa.

Burger, J. P. 1960. An English-Lozi vocabulary. Morija-Basutoland: Morija Printing Works.

Cantrell, John V. 1946. Some aspects of Mpondo and its relation to Xhosa and Zulu. Pretoria: University of South Africa MA thesis. 

Canonici, Noverino N. 1995. Zulu grammatical structures. 3rd edn. Durban: Dept. of Zulu Language and Literature, University of Natal.

Chaphole, Solomon Rampasane. 1988. A study of the auxiliary in Sesotho. Cape Town: University of Cape Town.

Cole, Desmond T. 1955. An introduction to Tswana grammar. Cape Town: Longman.

Crane, Thera Marie, Stefan Savić, Onelisa Slater & Rasmus Bernander. 2024. Modal Expressions in Xhosa, Part I: Necessity. Africana Linguistica 30: 39–70.

Crane, Thera Marie, Remah Lubambo, Msuswa Petrus Mabena, Cordlia Nkwinika, Muhle Sibisi & Onelisa Slater. 2025. What can be said? Variation among expressions of modal possibility in a South African language cluster. Studies in Language 49(1): 44–92.

Crane, Thera Marie, Stefan Savić, Onelisa Slater & Rasmus Bernander. 2025 (forthcoming). Modal expressions in Xhosa, part II: Possibility. Africana Linguistica 31 (to appear, December 2025). 

Cuenod, R. 1967. Tsonga-English Dictionary. Braamfontein: Sasavona.

Desmond, Cole & Lally Moncho-Warren. 2011. Setswana and English illustrated dictionary. MacMillan South Africa Publishers.

Doke, Clement Martyn. 1982 [1927]. Textbook of Zulu grammar. Sixth edn. Cape Town: Maskew Miller Longman.

Doke, Clement Martyn & Benedict Wallet Vilakazi. 1972. Zulu–English dictionary. 2nd edn. Johannesburg: Witwatersrand University Press.

Doke, Clement Martyn & Sophonia Machabe Mofokeng. 1957. Textbook of Southern Sotho Grammar. Cape Town: Longmans, Green & Co.

du Plessis, Jan Adriaan & Marianna W. Visser. 1992. Xhosa syntax. Pretoria: Via Afrika.

Fortune, George. 1955. An analytical grammar of Shona. London: Longmans, Green & Co.

Fortune, George. 1977. An outline of Silozi grammar. Bookworld Publishers. Lusaka, Zambia

Gibson, Hannah, & Lutz Marten. 2016. Variation and grammaticalisation in Bantu complex verbal constructions: The dynamics of information growth in Swahili, Rangi and siSwati. In Léa Nash & Pollet Samvelian (eds.), Approaches to complex predicates, 70–109. Brill.

Gibson, Hannah & Kristina Riedel. 2021. Auxiliaries in Southern Bantu languages. Presentation given at Southern African Linguistics and Applied Linguistics Society 2021, online conference. University of the Free State.

Gowlett, Derek F. 1967. Morphology of the verb in Lozi. University of the Witwatersrand.  (MA thesis.)

isiZulu.net. Zulu-English Dictionary. 2004-2025. https://isizulu.net/

Iziko lesiHlathululi-mezwi sesiNdebele. 2006. IsiNdebele–English / English–isiNdebele: IsiHlathululi-mezwi / Bilingual and explanatory dictionary. Cape Town: Phumelela.

Jalla, Adolphe. 1917. Elementary grammar of the Sikololo language. Torre Pelice, Italy: Imprimérie Alpine.

Jalla, Adolphe. 1936. Dictionary of the Lozi language, 1: Lozi–English. 2nd edn. London: United Society for Christian Literature (USCL).

Jalla, Adolphe. 1982. Silozi–English dictionary. 3rd ed. Revised and enlarged by the Literature Committee of the United Church of Zambia. Lusaka: National Educational Company of Zambia (NECZAM). (Version available online https://www.barotseland.net/sil-eng1.htm) (accessed 18 March 2025).

Kriel, Theunis Johannes. 1976. Popular Northern Sotho dictionary: Northern Sotho–English, English–Northern Sotho. 2nd edition edn. Pretoria: J L van Schaik. 342pp. 

Lanham, Leonard Walter. 1955. A study of Gitonga of Inhambane. (Bantu Linguistic Studies I). Johannesburg: Witwatersrand University Press.

Lee, Seunghun J., & Crous Hlungwani. 2015. Aspectual auxiliary verbs in Xitsonga.  Stellenbosch Papers in Linguistics Plus 48: 113–135.

Lombard, Daniel P., Egidius Benedictus  van Wyk & Pothinus C. Mokgokong. 1985. Introduction to the grammar of Northern Sotho. Pretoria: J.L. van Schaik.

Makwarela, Vhangani Petrus. 1992. The Consecutive in Venda. Johannesburg: Randse Afrikaanse Universiteit MA thesis.

Meeussen, A.E. 1967. Bantu Grammatical Reconstructions. Africana Linguistica 3. 80–121.

Mini, B. M., S. L. Tshabe, F. M. Shoba & P. N. van der Westhuizen. 2003. The greater dictionary of isiXhosa. Vol 2: K to P. Alice: University of Fort Hare. 

Mkhatshwa, Simon Nyana. 1991. Metaphorical extensions as a basis for grammaticalization with special reference to Zulu auxiliary verbs. Pretoria: University of South Africa MA thesis.

Mphasha, Eleazar L., Sanna H. Baker, Leften M. Matheere & Yuko Abe. 2021. Northern Sotho/Sesotho sa Leboa (S32). In: Seughun J. Lee, Yuko Abe & Daisuke Shinagawa (eds.), Descriptive materials of morphosyntactic microvariation in Bantu vol. 2: A microparametric survey of morphosyntactic microvariation in Southern Bantu languages, 333–386.Tokyo University of Foreign Studies. 

Netshisaulu, N. C. & Mbedzi, Salphina & Lee, Seughun J. Tshivenda (S21). In: Seughun J. Lee, Yuko Abe & Daisuke Shinagawa (eds), Descriptive materials of morphosyntactic microvariation in Bantu vol. 2: A microparametric survey of morphosyntactic microvariation in Southern Bantu languages, 77–133. Tokyo University of Foreign Studies.

Oosthuysen, Jacobus Christiaan. 2016. The grammar of IsiXhosa. Stellenbosch: SUN Press.

O'Sullivan, Owen. 1993. English–Silozi dictionary. Lusaka: Zambia Educational Publ. House.

Pahl, H.W., A.M. Pienaar & T.A. Ndungane. 1989. The greater dictionary of Xhosa. Vol 3: Q to Z. Alice: University of Fort Hare.

Pelling, J. N. 1971. A practical Ndebele dictionary. Longman.

Pelling, James & Pamela Pelling. 1974.  Lessons in Ndebele. Longman Zimbabwe.

Pietraszko, Joanna. 2017. Inflectional dependencies: a study of complex verbal expressions in Ndebele. Chicago: University of Chicago PhD dissertation,

Poulos, George. 1990. A linguistic analysis of Venda. Pretoria: Via Afrika.

Poulos, George & Louwrens, Louis J. 1994. A linguistic analysis of Northern Sotho. Pretoria: Via Afrika.

Poulos, George & Msimang, Christian T. 1998. A linguistic analysis of Zulu. Pretoria: Via Afrika.

Pretorius, Rigardt Samuel. 1997. Auxiliary verbs as a subcategory of the verb in Tswana. Potchefstroom: North-West University (South Africa) PhD dissertation.

Pretorius, Rigardt, & Berg, Ansu. 2019. An LFG analysis of Setswana auxiliary verb phrases indicating tense. In Miriam Butt, Tracy Holloway King &Ida Toivonen (eds.), Proceedings of the LFG’19 conference, 233–250. Stanford: CSLI Publications.

Setshedi, Jacob Ediasefagwa. 1974. The auxiliary verbs and the deficient verbs in Tswana. South Africa: University of the North MA thesis.

Skhosana, Philemon Buti. 2009. The linguistic relationship between Southern and Northern Ndebele. Pretoria: University of South Africa PhD dissertation.

Taljaard, P.C., J.N. Khumalo & Sonja E. Bosch. 1991. Handbook of siSwati. Pretoria: J.L. van Schaik.

Tshabe, S.L. & F.M. Shoba. 2006. The greater dictionary of isiXhosa. Vol 1: A to J. Alice: University of Fort Hare. 

Ziervogel, Dirk. 1959. A grammar of Northern Transvaal Ndebele. Pretoria: J.L. van Schaik.