Abstract
The conjoint (cj)/disjoint (dj) alternation, extensively documented in Narrow Bantu (see van der Wal & Hyman 2017 and references cited therein), Adamawa (Elders 2006), Benue-Kwa (Manfredi 2005), Nilo-Saharan (Joswig 2015), Gur (Fiedler 2017) has been reported in Bantoid only in Aghem and Ejagham (Anderson 1979, Watters 1979, Hyman & Watters 1984). Akumbu, Hyman & Kießling (2020) identify a much more extensive case, where the cj/dj contrast characterizes the affirmative perfective of all past, present and future tenses in Babanki, a Grassfields Bantu language of North-West Cameroon. Based on data I have compiled as a native speaker, in collaboration with four other native speakers, this study outlines the characteristics and conditions surrounding the choice of one form over the other in specific contexts. This detailed study reveals that the cj form encodes term focus since Babanki lacks a dedicated focus marker of the sort documented in closely related Aghem (Hyman 2010) and Isu (Kießling 2010) while the dj form is used contrastively with truth value focus and when the truth value is part of the assertion (i.e. not presupposed).
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
