A Grammar of Tamashek (Tuareg of Mali)

9.6 Preverbs 593

(647) Future Negative (T-ka)

u-mar anhay-aer

Neg-Fut see.Shlmpf-lSgS

Ί will not see.'

The uncertain segmentability of T-ka u-mar is brought out in
combinations involving a clitic. Three distinct constructions are attested (648).

(648) a. u-mar-\taen

Neg-Fut-\3MaP10

Ί won't hit them.'

9W9t-aer

hit.Shlmpf-lSgS

b. wasrAtsen mar

Neg-\3MaP10 Fut

Ί won't hit them.'

3W3t-3£Y

hit.Shlmpf-lSgS

c. waerAhln

Neg-\Centrif

Ί won't forget.'

u-mar Itaw-aev

Neg-Fut forget.Shlmpf-lSgS

In (648.a), ύ-mar functions as a unit and precedes the clitic. This is the
most common pattern. In (648.b), ύ-mar is replaced by the more transparent
waer ... mar, with the clitic intervening. (648.c) is like (648.b) except that we
get waer ... u-mar with the fused form ü-mar after the clitic. In this case, the
fusion of ύ-mar is such that it can be taken as a variant Fut allomorph used in
negative contexts.
For R (which however prefers waer ... e) I have also heard a variant Neg +
Fut form ammar instead of ü-mar. This results in an even more opaque form
hardly worthy of hyphenation. An example is ammar i-saw 'he will not
drink'.
The Diebok dialect near Gao was not investigated in detail, but the two
examples in (649) were obtained for this dialect from literacy specialists in
Gao. It appears that -sa- is a Future element fused with Neg waer, much as
-mar- is for T-ka. In (649.b), it appears that -sa- is reduced to -s- before a
V-initial verb, but the overall allomorphy and its morphosyntactic distribution
are not clear to me.

(649) a. waer-sa-\dd
Neg-Fut-\Centrip
'He won't come.'

0-as

3SgS-come.ShImpf

b. wasr-s

Neg-Fut

'He won't eat.'

0-asksu

3SgS-eat.ShImpf