Enfoque desde el punto de la Neuroarquitectura

Propositional questions in Macedonian can be formed in three ways (Minova-Gurkiova 1987, 1990, 1994, as cited by Lazarova-Nikovska 2003): (i) by intonation alone, (ii) by fronting the main verb and (iii) by adding a particle such as dali, li, dane or zar(em).

3.3.1 The clitic li

First I will discuss the particle li, which in the literature has been described as either a question particle or a focus particle or both (Schwabe 2004).The particle li is attested in almost all the Slavic languages. In Macedonian li is a clitic which can be clitized to a verb, a noun phrase, an adjective phrase or a prepositional phrase. It has been analyzed as a question particle (Rudin et al. 1999, Lazarova-Nikovska 2003) due to its co-occurrence with propositional questions. An example of this use from my corpus is given in (53a-b). In (53a) li ‘FOC’ takes scope over the pronoun jas ‘I’, while in (53b) it takes scope over the prepositional phrase vo sobata ‘in the room’. The reply in (53b) is a repetition of the focused constituent. These utterances are from a recorded game of 20 Questions. 53a) Jas li sum?

jas li sum

PRO:1SG.NOM FOC be.1SG.PRES ‘Is it my turn?’

b) C: ‘Uhhmm... vo sobata li e?’

uhm vo soba-ta li e

uhm in room-DET.F FOC be.3SG.PRES ‘Uhhmm… is it in the room?’

D: ‘Vo sobata.’

‘(Yes) in the room.’ (conversation V 07:02)

However, this particle is not obligatory and in fact, more often left out than used when forming propositional questions. Englund (1977) found, on the basis of a corpus of literary works, that only thirty percent of the propositional questions in Macedonian were formed with li. Schwabe (2004) attempts to give an analysis of li that is suitable for all the Slavic languages. However, this leads to a hypothesis that there can be two separate versions of the clitic li within a language: one attached to an XP, indicating focus and one attached to a V, indicating interrogativity. An example of this second type of li is given in example (54) from Lazarova-Nikovska (2003).

54) Vozi li majka ti avtomobil?

vozi li majka ti avtomobil

drive.3SG.PRES FOC mother CL.GEN.2SG car

‘Does your mother drive a car?’ (ex .9 from Lazarova-Nikovska 2003:133)

In (54) the focus particle takes scope over the verb vozi ‘drives’, thus putting the main element of the clause, namely the verb, in focus. Thus, li in Macedonian can be seen as a focus particle that gets

33 used in questions, rather than an actual question particle. The use of li in questions implies surprise by putting more focus on the questioned constituent. The reason it has been seen as a question particle, rather than a focus particle, could be due to confusing it with the use of it in Bulgarian. In Bulgarian questions with li are the default and unmarked form (Englund 1977). It seems, however, that li in Macedonian is not the same as li in Bulgarian, despite the closeness of the two languages. Due to the co-occurrence of li with questions for extra emphasize, it could have been reanalyzed as a question particle. The actual interrogative meaning in Macedonian, however, comes from the intonation.

In my corpus, speakers more often didn’t than did employ the question particle, as is demonstrated in the conversation in (55).

55) A6: U Sonje e? 7

u Sonje e

in Sonje be.3SG.PRES

‘Is it in Sonje?’ B: Ne.

‘No.’

C: Vo ucilica e, na školo?

vo ulica e na školo

in street be.3SG.PRES on school ‘Is it on the street, at school?’

B: Ne.

‘No.’

D: Klupa u parkčeto?

klupa vo park-če-to

bench in park-DIM-DET.N ‘A bench in the park?’

B: Ne.

‘No.’

A: U duḱanot e?

u duḱan-ot e

in store-DET.M be.3SG.PRES ‘Is it in the store?’

D: Ama siguren si deka e od drvo?

ama siguren si deka e od drvo

AD.CONJ sure be.2SG that be.3SG.PRES from wood ‘But you are sure that it is wooden?’

B: Da, u duḱanot e.

da u duḱan-ot e

yes in store-DET.M be.3SG.PRES ‘Yes it is in the store.’

Example (55) is an excerpt of a recording of a game of 20 questions. It shows that short questions are often formed without any particles.

Furthermore, li ‘FOC’ can be combined with the subjunctive particle da, forming the question marker

dali.

6 _{Participant A is a male aged 50 from Skopje, though his family is from Serbia. Participant B is a male aged 7}

from Skopje and is the son of Participant D. Participant C is a university-educated and university-employed female aged 43 from Skopje. Participant D is a university-educated male aged 46 from Skopje.

34

3.3.2 Dali as a question marker

Other than the clitic li ‘FOC’, dali ‘Q’is a full morphological word with its own stress, occurring on the endge of the left periphery (Lazarova-Nikovska 2003). Since li ‘FOC’ is a clitic, when it takes scope over the whole sentence, it needs something on the left periphery to combine to and thus combines with the subjunctive particle da. Thus, dali ‘Q’ is used to emphasize the whole question rather than one constituent of it and can therefore be seen as a question marker.

An example of the use of dali ‘Q’ from recorded conversations of 20 Questions are given in examples (56) and (57) below.

56) C: Dali e na masava?

da-li e na masa-va

SBJ-FOC be.3SG.PRES on table-PROX ‘Is it on this table?’

D: Na masava!

na masa-va

on table-PROX

‘(Yes) on this table!’ (conversation B&V 08:49) 57) C: Dali e od staklo?

da-li e od staklo

SBJ-FOC be.3SG.PRES from glass ‘Is it made out of glass?’

D: Epa ne e od staklo.

‘Well, it is not made out of glass.’ (conversation B&V 08:58)

Note that during the whole game, it was only Speaker C who employed li ‘FOC’ and dali ‘Q’ in het questions on a regular basis.

Furthermore, dali ‘Q’can be used to embed questions, as show in (58).

58) Mislam deka treba da go prašaat momčeto pa momčeto da odluči dali ḱe ide kaj majktata ili ḱe ostane kaj tie.

misla-m deka treba da go praša-at

think-1SG.PRES that have.TO.3SG.PRES SBJ CL.ACC.3SG.M ask-1PL.PRES

momče-to pa momče-to da odluči dali ḱe

boy-DET.M THEN boy-DET.M SBJ decide.3SG.PRESSBJ-FOC FUT

ide kaj majka-ta ili ḱe ostane kaj tie

go.3SG.PRES at mother-DET.F DISJ FUT stay.3SG.PRES at them

‘I think they should ask the boy and then the boy should decide whether to go to the mother or stay with them.’ (dilemma tale L 38:33)

When a conditional clause is questioned, the question particle is ungrammatical, as shown in (59). This is unlike Wolof, where ndax ‘Q’ and bu ‘if’ can co-occur, see Chapter 5.

59) *(Dali) ako toa može na toj način da se kaže?

ako toa može na toj način da se kaže

COND that can.3SG.PRES on that way SBJ REFL say.3SG.PRES ‘If you can say it like that?’ (conversation B 01:02:40)

Thus, dali ‘Q’ is used when a whole clause is focused in a question, either in matrix or embedded propositional questions.

35

3.3.2 Other question markers

In this section I discuss the particles zar(em) ‘as if’ and da ne ‘is it?’.

Zar ‘Q’is a conducive question particle, its use is shown in example (60). 60) Zar ušte ne mi veruvaš, Boško!

zar ušte ne mi veruva-š Boško

Q more NEG CL.1SG.DAT believe-2SG.PRES Boshko ‘Why, do you still not believe me, Boshko?!’ (Lunt 1952:135)

When the particle zar is used, the expected answer is ‘no’. In fact, the answer is already presupposed by the speaker and astonishment about the situation is expressed (Koneski 1967).

The combination da ne ‘Q’ is also used in questions, as shown in (61). 61) Tapa da ne e?

tapa da ne e

cork SBJ NEG be.3SG.PRES ‘Is it a cork?’ (conversation V 09:20)

According to Tomić (2012) da ne consists of the affirmative da ‘yes’ and the negation, rather than the

subjunctive particle da. This is however in conflict with a previous example containing da ne which she lists as an example of a bare subjunctive, but which is similar in meaning to (61). This example is presented in (62).

62) Da ne e dojden veke?

da ne e dojde-n veḱe?

SBJ NEG be-3SG.PRES come-M.SG.PTCP already

‘Could it (not) be that he has already come?!’ (ex. 46b from Tomić 2012)

Tomić (2012) glosses da in (62) as a subjunctive, but later goes on to state that the combination da ne ‘Q’ does not contain the subjunctive particle da, but the affirmative da ‘yes’. This would mean that there are two different constructions da ne which are employed in similar environments, which would be redundant.

As for the negation ne ‘not’, this also comes into play in tag questions, which is the concern of the next section.

3.3.3 Tag questions

The negation ne ‘not’ and the focus particle li make the tag question neli ‘isn’t it?’

Neli ‘isn’t it?’ can appear at the left or right periphery, as demonstrated by examples (63a-b).

63a) Taka neli?

taka ne-li

like.that NEG-FOC ‘It’s like that isn’t it?

b) Neli saka CO2 ova rastenievo?

ne-li saka CO2 ov-a rastenie-vo

NEG-FOC want.3SG.PRES CO2 PROX-N plant-PROX

‘This plant likes CO2 right?’ (conversation B 16:40)

However, neli ‘isn’t it?’ doesn’t need to appear in the periphery of a clause, it can also appear parenthetically. In example (64) below, neli ‘isn’t it?’ is used parenthetically in the middle of a sentence as a discourse marker.

36 64) Imigracija za studenti... ne imigracija tuku da studiraat, neli, vo Avstralija i Nov Zeland.

imigracija za student-i ne imigracija tuku immigration for student-PL NEG immigration AD.CONJ

da studira-at ne-li vo Avstralija i Nov Zeland

SBJ study-3PL.PRES NEG-FOC in Australia CONJ New Zealand ‘Immigration for students… not immigration, but for them to study, you know, in Australia and New Zealand.’ (conversation B 39:47)

It is clear from (64) that the English translation ‘isn’t it’ is not adequate to cover the meaning of the tag neli in Macedonian, as it is a more broadly used discourse marker which a speaker can use when seeking agreement from the hearer.

Thus, we have seen that propositional questions in Macedonian can be optionally marked with li ‘foc’ or dali ‘q’. In conducive questions the particles zar and da ne are used, both expecting an affirmative answer. The negation which plays a role in the question marker da ne, is also used in tag questions, which take the form neli ‘isn’t it?’