The nouns 'child' and 'women' inflect as plurals, but may be used as singulars as well (and show corresponding singular agreement).1
Tsez has four genders: I (for male humans), II (female humans and some inanimates, III (animals and some inanimates) and IV (the remainder) (Polinsky & Comrie 1999: 110), marked on verbs by the following prefixes:
singular | plural | |
I | ̣Ø- | b- |
II | ỵ- |
r-
|
III | b- | |
IV | r- |
Of significance for the discussion below are the agreement forms for gender III in the singular, and gender I in the singular and plural. Note also that the demonstrative distinguishes singular from plural, and that within the singular, it distinguishes gender I from the others.
singular of gender III
|
||
howdu | k’et’u | b-ik’i-s |
this.II/III/IV.ABS | cat(III)[SG.ABS] | III.SG-go-PST.WIT |
'This cat went.' |
singular of gender I
|
plural of gender I
|
|||||
howda | uži | Ø-ik’i-s | howziri | uži-bi | b-ik’i-s | |
this.I.ABS | boy(I)[SG.ABS] | I-go-PST.WIT | these.ABS | boy(I)-PL.ABS | I.PL-go-PST.WIT | |
'This boy went.' | 'These boys went.' |
singular | plural | |
ABS | besuro | besuro-bi |
ERG | besur-a: | besuro-z-a: |
DAT | besuro-r | besuro-za-r |
INS | besuro-d | besuro-za-d |
GEN 1 | besuro-s | besuro-za-s |
GEN 2 | besuro-z | besuro-za-z |
The noun xexbi 'child' is morphologically plural: its has an absolutive ending -bi, and its oblique stem is formed with the augment -z(a). Nevertheless, it can be used as a singular, as evidenced by agreement. Two patterns are found, an older one and an innovative one (Comrie 2001: 381-383). In the traditional pattern, the singular is treated as gender III and the plural as gender I:
'child' (gender III)
|
'children' (gender I)
|
|||||
howdu | xex-bi | b-ik’i-s | howziri | xex-bi | b-ik’i-s | |
this.II/III/IV.ABS | child-PL.ABS | III.SG-go-PST.WIT | these.ABS | child-PL.ABS | I.PL-go-PST.WIT | |
'This child went.' | 'These children went.' |
'child' (gender I)
|
||
howda | xex-bi | Ø-ik’i-s |
this.I.ABS | child-PL.ABS | I-go-PST.WIT |
'This child went.' |
The noun ɣanabi 'woman' behaves similarly.
Comrie, Bernard. 2001. How independent is Tsezic morphology? In: Mary Andronis, Christopher Ball, Heidi Elston and Sylvain Neuvel (eds) CLS 37: The Panels: 2001: Proceedings from the Parasessions of the 37th Meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society. Volume 37-2. Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society. 367-383.
Comrie, Bernard and Maria Polinsky. 1998. The great Daghestanian case hoax. In: Anna Siewierska, and Jae Jung Song (eds) Case, typology and grammar: in honor of Barry J. Blake. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 95-114.
Corbett, Greville. Forthcoming. Deponency, syncretism and what lies in between. In Matthew Baerman, Greville Corbett, Dunstan Brown and Andrew Hippisley (eds) Deponency and morphological mismatches. Oxford: Oxford University Press for the British Academy.
1 The material presented here is adapted from Corbett (forthcoming).