A Grammar of Tamashek (Tuareg of Mali)

3.5 Syntactically controlled phonological processes 151

stem. The use of a stripped-down, minimal verb form after the Future particle

is roughly similar to the use of phonologically reduced noun and verb forms in

Y position in [X Y...] syntactic combinations. However, the combination of

Future particle plus Shlmpf does not fit the prototypical [X Y...] pattern, which

requires adjacency of X and Y. By contrast, the Shlmpf stem need not be

adjacent to the Future particle. This is because a combination [Future +

Shlmpf clause] may be followed by a second Shlmpf clause without repeating

the Future particle (§13.4).

3.5.2.2 Verbs after Negative particles

The basic Negative preverb is waer, used in all MAN combinations (e.g.

perfective, imperfective, imperative). In all of the interactions described below,

the Neg preverb must be adjacent to the affected verb.

In the perfective, if the verb stem is bisyllabic and ends in ...aeC-, the ae is

converted to e. Bisyllabic V-final verbs, i.e. those of the shape -vC(C)i> or

-uC(C)i>, allow this vocalic substitution to apply in combinations where the

stem-final full V appears as se in combination with a subject suffix. The

modified stem with e is the PerfN (perfective negative) stem, and is part of the

"perfective system." For other verbs, and for -vC(C)i> or -OC(C)D- verbs with

no subject suffix, the PerfN is indistinguishable from the PerfP (perfective

positive).

The modification in the PerfN is treated formally here as the effect of an

ablaut formative e-pclf (§3.4.4, §7.2.2.3), where e targets the first

postconsonantal short V if this V is also stem-final in the sense indicated. Note

that this stem-modification is additive (i.e. it increases phonological

markedness) rather than reductive.

In the imperfective (indicative), the only stem that can directly follow the

Neg particle is the long imperfective. In comparison with the positive form

(LoImpfP), the negative counterpart (LoImpfN) is characterized by

melody, and by the absence of the ablaut features that lengthen and accent the

first postconsonantal V in the LoImpfP, i.e. χ-pcl and χ-pcl. Since the

LoImpfP can have or melody depending on its syllabic shape, the

melodic difference between LoImpfP and LoImpfN is audible only for those

verbs whose LoImpfP has melody. Example: 'destroy', with LoImpfP

-hdllaek- and LoImpfN -hsllak-. These two forms differ in having versus

melody, and in that -hallsek- has an accented full ά while -halbk- has no

full V and no marked accent. For more on long imperfectives see §7.2.5.

In the imperative, there are two options for negation. One is to use the

same PerfN form described above, so 'don't-Sg eat!' is identical to 'you-Sg

didn't eat'. The other is to use a stem of the long imperfective family, with the

same vocalic melody as the LoImpfP, but without the formatives χ-pcl and

χ-pcl. I refer to this stem as the Prohibitive]. Thus 'don't-Sg destroy!' can be