-
(College Notes for LANG 501 Typology Paper)
Affixal Nasal Negation Strategy in Classical Medew Neter, Akan, Nubian (Negro-Egyptian)Both Akan and Middle Egyptian use a nasal consonant [n], as a prefix to negate verbs and nouns with fusion tendencies. This is a morphological operation (prefixation), not merely a shared nasal sound. The prefixal nasal negation strategy, defined as the morphological fusion of a nasal consonant [n] or [m] as a prefix directly attached to a verb or noun to indicate negation, is not a productive or widespread process in Indo-European or Semitic languages as it is in some African languages. In Indo-European languages, many negation markers do historically derive from the Proto-Indo-European root *ne, which involved a nasal element. This root evolved into various negative prefixes such as {un} in English, {in} in Latin, [a-/an], the alpha privative in Greek and Sanskrit, and similar forms in other branches.
Akan (probably need more insight from linguists/members in the group)
Negation in Akan involves a nasal prefix [n-, m-, ŋ-] attached directly to the verb.
Example:
mɪ tɪ “I speak” →
mɪ ntɪ “I don’t speak”
Middle Egyptian
In Middle Egyptian, the particle n is prefixed to verbs or nouns.
Example:
sfTt.f “he accepts” →
n sfTt.f “he does not accept”
The prefixal nasal negation strategy (morphological fusion of a nasal prefix with the verb or noun) seems to be more prevalent in African languages (not apodictic, more research will conclude). The morphological fusion of a nasal prefix for negation seems to be unique to the Negro-Egyptian languages like Akan and Middle Egyptian. Semitic and Asian languages do not use this strategy. Even in Afroasiatic (excluding Egyptian), most branches (Semitic, Berber) use standalone particles or infixes, not nasal prefixes.
Nubian languages also have nasal elements involved in verbal morphology, including negation, but the evidence for a clear, consistent prefixal nasal negation system analogous to Akan or Middle Egyptian is quite different yet related. According to research, there is mention of an archaic Nubian prefix m- that can serve as a verbal negation marker, suggesting some prefixal nasal negation in Nubian dialects or historical stages (Jakobi & Dimmendaal, 1992). Morphological fusion of nasal negation markers (prefixes or suffixes) is a shared feature across African languages, regardless of affix position. This includes:
Akan (Negro-Egyptian):
Nasal prefixes [n-, m-, ŋ-] fused to verbs (Heine & Nurse, 2000).
Middle Egyptian (Negro-Egyptian):
Nasal prefix n- fused to verbs or nouns (Allen, 2013).
Nubian (Negro-Egyptian):
Nasal suffixes [min, -men] fused to verbs (Jakobi & Dimmendaal, 1992).
This broadens the original parallel to include nasal negation as a fused morpheme (prefix or suffix) across three major (non-proven/provisional) African language families.
Dogon Tommo So clearly qualifies as it uses suffixal negation fused to verbs.
Ø-gú- “to drink” →
Ø-gú-lɛ́ “does not drink” [imperfective negative].Ø-bɛ́- “to come” →
Ø-bɛ́-lá “did not come” [perfective negative].Commentary:
A major strength of this analysis is its focus on the morphological mechanism of negation—specifically, the fusion of a nasal element with the verb or noun as a marker of negation. This approach highlights a typologically significant feature that sets certain Negro-Egyptian languages apart from most other language families, including Semitic and Asian languages, where negation is typically achieved through separate particles or infixes rather than nasal prefixes (Loprieno, 1995). The comparative evidence from Akan and Middle Egyptian (Classical) is particularly compelling, as both languages demonstrate a clear, productive use of a nasal prefix for negation, and this is further supported by related phenomena in Nubian and Dogon languages (Jakobi & Dimmendaal, 1992; Creissels, 2013; ). The inclusion of Dogon and Nubian expands the scope of the argument and suggests a possible areal or typological pattern across Africa (Heine & Nurse, 2000). A notable weakness, however, lies in the limited documentation and potential overgeneralization regarding the Nubian languages in this preliminary analysis; while there is evidence for nasal negation markers, the consistency and productivity of this system in Nubian is less clear than in Akan or Egyptian (Jakobi & Dimmendaal, 1992). Furthermore, whether this feature is unique to African languages may be overstated, as typological research confirms similar processes elsewhere, though rarely and not as a core grammatical strategy in Indo-European or Semitic (). Another limitation is the lack of detailed phonological and syntactic context for each language’s negation system, which would be necessary to fully support claims of typological uniqueness or genetic relationship. This analysis would benefit from a broader survey of negation strategies in the Negro-Egyptian languages to strengthen the hypothesis. Finally, the role of language contact, diffusion, and the historical development of negation markers needs further exploration. Overall, while the nasal prefixal negation strategy is well-documented in Akan and Middle Egyptian, further comparative and diachronic research is needed to clarify its distribution, origins, and typological significance cross-linguistically in Negro-Egyptian.
More timely sources will be used for paper.
