Morpheme combination in kihaya

Despite the studies that have been carried out on morpheme combination in the Bantu languages, (Hayman 2007), there is limited available research on Kihaya morpheme combinations. This lack of research particularly pertains to verb extensions. As earlier noted by functional diversity and frequent occurrence in long succession. Kihaya has seven (7) verbal extension which can be added to the root individually or in combination. For example; a verb may have verb extensions such as:

Reeb – a (see)

Reeb – an- (see with)

Reeb –an-a (see each other)

Reeb –w-a (be seen)

Reeb-es-an-a (make each other to see)

Reeb-an-is-a (make to see each other)

Reeb-es-an-is-ibw-a (be  made to make them see each other)

In the last example, (es,an,w, is, ibw) are all verb extensions that have different functions. The position of the causative morphs es and is in the above example is also different, but there is no study available that establishes if the combination of verbal extensions and their sequence is significant in Kihaya

Morpheme order

Although the Bantu verb template is presumed to present a fixed order to morphemes and provides slot 4 in table 1, for example, as a slot for tense aspect markers, some  morphemes in Kihaya violate the order. Specific cases are: progressive ni, reflexive e and past ire, which have positons that differ from the order of the Bantu template. As indicated by the Kihaya template represented in table 2, ni comes before the subject marker in the construction while other tense/aspect markers follow the subject marker.

Ni-ba-mu-reeb-a (they are seeing him)

Ba-ka-mu-reeb-a (they saw him [last yeay or some moths bak]).

Ba-mu-reeb-ire (they saw him [yesterday]).

In the above very constructions, ni, ka, and ire are tense/aspect markers but appear in different positions with respect to the root. Also, the order of verb extensions in the template does not necessarily mean that it is the order of in an actual utterance. On the contrary, the position of verbal extensions frequently depends on the argument structure. This suggests that there is no fixed order in which they are supposed to appear in the construction of the verb. For examkpel, a verb root may have the following combinations of extensions.

Reeb-a (see)

Reeb-es-a (see with)

Reeb-an-a (see each other)

Reeb-es-an-a (make each other to see)

Reeb-an-is-a (make ---- to see each other)

Reeb-an-is-ibw-a (be made to make --- see each other)

Reeb-er-a (see for)

Reeb-er-an-a (see for each other)

Since, in the above example, is and es are both causatives, there appears to be some flexibility in the position of causatives in the verb structure and, consequently, in the manner in which morphemes may precede and follow one another.

Allomorphy

Kihaya has various allomorphs (i.e. different realizations of the same morphemes). A case in point here is the causative morpheme which has four different realizations (es/is/iz/s/y). applicative, passive, stative and reversive morphemes are no exception. All such allomorphs pose a challenge to computational modeling. In additions, Kihaya has various allomorphs, that is, a single morpheme can be realized in two or more different ways. A case in point here is a causative morpheme which has four different realizations (es/is/iz/ez/sy/y). the following is an example: reebesa (bause….to see) kwatisa (cause…. to touch) gurusya (cause ---------jump) riza (cause ….. to cry) teeza (cause…..to beat) hamya (make……firm). Applicative, passive, reverse and intensive morphemes also behave in a more or less similar manner.