:: Serials :: Corona College Of Education E-Resources

On Polar Question in Echie and English: A Transformational Approach

AFRREV VOL 14 (1), S/NO 57, JANUARY, 2020

African Research Review: An International

Multidisciplinary Journal, Ethiopia

AFRREV Vol. 14 (1), Serial No 57, January, 2020: 72-83

ISSN 1994-9057 (Print) ISSN 2070-0083 (Online)

DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.4314/afrrev.v14i1.7

On Polar Question in Echie and English: A Transformational

Approach

Nwala, Michael Alozie

Department of English Studies

University of Port Harcourt, Choba, Port Harcourt

Rivers State, Nigeria

E-mail: Michael.nwala@uniport.edu.ng

Abstract

The formation of polar question also called a Yes-No question, appears to be language-

specific, a situation which makes Echie speakers to find it difficult to accommodate the

system of the English language, vice versa. This paper, using the qualitative design and the

transformation approach, investigated the structural forms of both languages. The analysis

showed great structural differences in both languages: while there is a swop in the position of

the subject and the auxiliary in English, there is no such in Echie. In Echie, there are two

forms of polar question realization: the resumptive pronoun type and the emphatic

construction type. The paper noted that, although, the structural and derivational forms

parametrically differ, polar questions exist in both languages and also perform the same

syntactic and functional communicative roles.

Key Words:Polar, resumptive, inversion, emphatic, transformation

Introduction

Interrogation is a discourse function of language used to elicit different forms of responses. It

is basically concerned with the expression of thought but in the form of question.

Interrogation is used in grammar classification of verb forms (Emenanjo, 2015) or sentence

types which are usually in contrast to declarative or affirmative forms.

There are three classifications of questions in human language, in terms of the answers

expected from the respondents. They are:

a. The Polar or Yes-No Question

b. The WH-Question, and

c. The Indirect Question

Indexed African Journals Online: www.ajol.info

Indexed Society of African Journals Editors (SAJE); https://africaneditors.org/

AFRREV VOL 14 (1), S/NO 57, JANUARY, 2020

The Polar or Yes-No Question, which is the focus of this paper, is the type where the

expected response is either yes or no that is an affirmation or denial of a statement. Their

formations generally involve a transformation of an initial declarative or affirmative statement

to an interrogative one

Nwala (2013) observed the above and states that to form a polar question in English, we

usually swop the position of the auxiliary of the sentence with that of the subject of the

sentence: subject- auxiliary inversion. Similarly, Ndimele (2003) noted that Yes-No questions

are those which are used by the questioner to elicit a “yes” or “no” response from the hearer.

He identifies two types of Yes-No questions in Echie language: the resumptive pronoun type;

and the emphatic question type. In addition, Ndimele (2003) asserted that the resumptive

pronoun type in Echie is signalled by a low tone which is marked on a pronominal or subject

c1itic element in pre-verbal position. He goes further to say that in this type of question, there

is a demand for the truth-value of the whole utterance without an attempt to contradict any

part of the question.

The emphatic question type, according to Ndimele is not signalled by a low tone but can

optionally be introduced by ò-bu, (is it?). The low tone which signals a Yes-No question in

Echie is marked on the personal pronoun, ò and not on the subject pronominal clitic. The

syntactic or structural configurations of polar questions in both languages differ considerably,

no doubt, but they perform the same communicative function.

The WH-Question is the type that uses the Wh-words such as: who, when, where; what,

which, how, whose, why and whom. In English, the Wh-words are used as adjective,

interrogative adjective (e.g. who, which); adverb, interrogative adverb (e.g. why) and as

pronoun, interrogative pronoun (e.g. who). The position of the Wh-words is sentence internal

in English. The equivalent of the WH-Question words in Echie are onye (who); be-ole

(where) kwo ole (how), nni (what), ndii (which, what, where). Apart from ndii these wh-

words in Echie can appear sentence internal and final positions.

The indirect questions are either Yes-No or WH-Question which are usually embedded as NP

sentential complement or simply subordinate clauses in sentences. The different types of

questions and their forms are used to elicit different discourse responses, which may be direct

or indirect. The major aim of this paper is to investigate polar question formation in English

and Echie languages so as to identify any form of similarity or if there is/are forms of

language-specific formation or parametric significance. The implication of this is that the

findings of this study will guide linguists and language practitioners in both divide to reach

conclusions that will help L2 learners of both languages.

Linguistic Background of the Echie Language

Echie is one of the major languages spoken in Rivers State of Nigeria. There are five

discernible dialects or varieties of the Echie language: the Ozuzu, Omuma, central Echie,

Omuoye and Obite/Igbodho varieties. But in this article, we draw our data from the central

variety popularly considered as the standard variety.

Theoretical Framework: Contrastive Analysis

The Contrastive Analysis (henceforth, CA) is a theory of language learning introduced by

Robert Lado in 1957. It is a theory of language learning used to contrast and compare the

forms and structures of two or more languages in order to identify their similarities and

dissimilarities (Lado 1957; Wilkins 1972, Fries 1945). Linguistically, no two languages of

Indexed African Journals Online: www.ajol.info

Indexed Society of African Journals Editors (SAJE); https://africaneditors.org/

AFRREV VOL 14 (1), S/NO 57, JANUARY, 2020

the world are the same in structure. This simply means that at the various levels (i.e.

phonology, morphology, syntax, semantics and pragmatics) of language analysis, there are

observable differences in languages of the world. These differences can adequately be

accounted for, through a CA which is one of the surest and most important ways by which

linguistics is applied in second language teaching and learning. In the thinking of Nwala

(2015),

Contrastive analysis concerns two or more languages, a source language and

a target language. It is a systematic investigation which places two or more

languages side by side with the view to identifying their areas of similarities

and dissimilarities (p. 312)

Similarly, Klein (1986) cited in Tamunobelema (2018, p. 38), explained that “contrastive

hypothesis claims that the acquisition of an L2 that coincides with corresponding structure of

L1 are usually assimilated with great ease as a result of “positive transfer”. Nonetheless,

contrasting features present considerable difficulties and give rise to errors as a result of

negative transfer”. In a related opinion, Corder (1973, p. 48) stated that CA is “… the process

of comparing different languages mostly two languages to yield an account of the difference

between language: predicting learning problem or task the learner will meet in trying to

acquire the second language.” A CA is an aspect of second language learning whose duty is to

contrast synchronically, two language structures in such a way that the similarities and

dissimilarities can be revealed. Valsoman (1966, p. 34) cited in Corder (1973) defined

contrastive analysis as “a comparison of the two equivalent portions of two languages for the

purpose of isolating the problem that speakers of one language will have in acquiring the

other” (p. 41). Little wonder, Tamunobelema (2018, p. 39), opined that “contrastive analysis

believes that interference can be predicted on the basis of contrastive or differential analysis,

and that a CA is an attempt to predict and elucidate the reaction of learners in a given contrast

situation”. In a similar view, Schacter (1973, p. 210) cited in Tamunobelema (2018, p. 39),

held that CA is “the analysis of the similarities and differences between two or more

language”. He explains that the interference from L1, are the elementary problems of learning

a new language at various levels of linguistics study. Relatedly, Gast (2013, p. 61) narrowly

defined CA as “the study which investigates the difference between pairs (or small sets) of

languages against the background of similarities and with the purpose of providing input to

applied discipline such as foreign language teaching and translation studies.” In like manner,

Falk (1978, p. 9) cited in Corder (1973, p. 48) stated that CA is “the comparison of the

linguistic system of the source and the target language”. Consequently, Klein (1986, p. 53)

postulated that CA is “any investigation in which the sentence of two languages are

compared. A contrastive grammar establishes point – by –point relation between their

respective system, with the aim of explaining the problematic areas, and thereby helping

teachers to remedy errors made by speakers of one in learning the other”. In the same vein,

James (1980) cited in Tamunobelema (2018, p. 39), postulated that CA is a “linguistic

enterprise aimed at producing inverted (i.e. contrasting not comparative) two related

typologies”. He went on to say that it is for that reason that CA deals with languages in

contact, not in isolation. In a related way Gass and Selinker (1994, p. 59) viewed CA as “a

way of comparing languages in order to determine potential errors for the ultimate purpose of

isolating what needs to be learned and what does not need to be learned in a second language

learning situation”. Corroborating the above, Kohler (1974, p. 83) cited in Tamunobelema

(2018, p. 38), said that “the idea behind it is to find a way of predicting those mistakes in

Indexed African Journals Online: www.ajol.info

Indexed Society of African Journals Editors (SAJE); https://africaneditors.org/

AFRREV VOL 14 (1), S/NO 57, JANUARY, 2020

pronunciation and sentence construction which foreign leaners of a language are likely to

make and devise drills to prevent these mistakes from occurring”.

In the light of above, CA maybe described as systematic process of comparing or studying

two or more human languages with a view to sport-lighting or identifying the dissimilarities

and similarities between or among them. It is basically a method of second language study

which is believed to be teacher centred. In it, the teacher knows the differences or difficulties

that exist between the source language (SL) and the target language (TL), so that he or she

can teach better or explain both the structural and linguistic differences to the L2 learner. In

CA therefore, the analyst is usually preoccupied with the comparison of two languages (the

first language and second language of a language learner) so as to uncover areas of

differences and similarities to help the adult learner to acquire the language easily. This can

be achieved by means of placing the languages of interest or study, side by side and

describing their various features methodically.

Conceptual Review

1. Transformational Grammar

This is a subcomponent of the generative grammar. It is the subcomponent of the generative

grammar made up of T- rules - that operate on the D-Structure, which is generated, by the

rules of the base to derive the S-Structure. The base of the syntactic component is a system of

rules that generate a highly restricted (perhaps finite) set of basic strings. Chomsky (1964)

averred that the rules of the base generate restricted sentences called kernel sentences.

Transformation generally is the act of rearranging or reordering strings in other ways.

According to Chomsky (1964, p.136), the major function of transformational rule is to

convert an abstract D-Structure that expresses the content of a sentence into a fairly concrete

S-Structure that indicates its form. The D-Structure is the input of the grammar where the T-

rules operate to yield the output, the S-Structure. As the input of the grammar, the D-Structure

is called the Structural Description (SD), Structural Analysis (SA), or Structural Index (SI),

while the S-Structure is known as the Structural Change (SC). What the T- rules actually do is

to relate the D-Structure to the S-Structure, this presupposes that T-rules as it were cannot

introduce meaning-bearing elements nor can they delete lexical items unrecoverably

(Chomsky, 1964). They are said to be meaning preserving (Anagbogu, Mbah&Emeh, 2001).

There are four basic types of transformational rules. They are:

i. Movement rule or permutation

ii. Deletion rule

iii. Insertion rule or Adjunction

iv. Copying rule or Substitution.

(i) Movement rule

This is the T-rule, which involves the re-ordering or the movement of lexical items from one

position in the phrase marker to another. The movement of items generally from one position

to another in the phrase marker is for both stylistic and semantic reasons. The subject-

auxiliary inversion in English and resumptive pronoun situations of the Echie language use

for polar question formation, the dative (indirect object) movement, passive formation, affix-

Indexed African Journals Online: www.ajol.info

Indexed Society of African Journals Editors (SAJE); https://africaneditors.org/

AFRREV VOL 14 (1), S/NO 57, JANUARY, 2020

hopping or flip-flop are examples of movement T-rules. For explicitness, the paper shows

some instances of transformational constructions:

(a) Passive Formation

This is an optional transformational process, which relates or converts the active sentence to a

passive sentence. Passive formation involves agent postposing and patient preposing, thereby

changing the focus of emphasis in the sentence:

1a. Gloria bought the car (Active)

1b. The car was bought by Gloria (Passive)

1c. The car was bought (Passive)

The rule for deriving passive sentence can be formalized thus:

NP1- AUX-V - NP2 Active

NP2- AUX- be +en – V – by + NP1

Passive or

NP2 – AUX - be +en –V Passive

The conversion of an active sentence to a passive one as the example shows necessitates the

(optional) insertion of the preposition 'by’, the insertion of a 'Be' verb and the aspect tense

marker (be + en).

(b) Dative Formation

This is the T-rule that moves an indirect object leftward. It is a preposing of the indirect

object to a position, which is before the direct object and the consequence deletion of a

stranded preposition. The preposed indirect object follows the verb of the sentence in the

linear order. In English, not all the verbs can take two objects. Verbs that take two objects are

ditransitive verbs (also called, verbs of exchange of possession). Some examples of

ditransitive verbs are sell, buy, loan, borrow, dash, give, show, etc. Each of the verbs of the

sentences below has two objects.

2a. John gave a car to Juliet

3a. Nkechi loaned thousands toNgozi

4a. Comfort bought a house for thehusband.

The sentences after undergoing a dative transformational process will be:

2b. John gave Juliet a car

3b. Nkechi loaned Ngozi thousand

4b. Comfort bought the husband a house.

The objects in the bold faces are the indirect ones. In the (A) part of the sentences, they were

at their original positions, while their positions in the 'B' part are as a result of the dative T-

rule. Their movements as the (B) part of the sentences necessitated an obligatory deletion of

the prepositions to and for. This T-rule is also language-specific. It does not exist in Echie.

The rules for deriving dative, expressions can be presented thus:

Indexed African Journals Online: www.ajol.info

Indexed Society of African Journals Editors (SAJE); https://africaneditors.org/

AFRREV VOL 14 (1), S/NO 57, JANUARY, 2020

SD S

NP1 + AUX + V+ NP2- PP + NP3

SC S

NP1 + AUX + V + NP3 +NP2

(ii) Deletion Transformation

This is the transformational process that elides or deletes certain items of constructions as the

constructions are undergoing structural changes. Dative transformation is an example of

deletion T-rule. Other types of deletion transformations include, imperative construction, Equi

-VP deletion, Equi -NP deletion, deletion under the condition of identity(see Ndimele 1999,

Agbedo 2000, Anagbogu et al 2001 &Nwala 2016a). In this paper, the imperative deletion

situation and Equi -NP Deletion are used to show deletion situations:

(a) Imperative deletion

An imperative sentence is the typethat issues directives, orders and commands. Examples of

imperative sentences are:

5. Sweep the house!

6. Go to the school!

7. Do it now!

8. Go there!

The sentences above have no overt subjects. The opinion in the literature is that the sentences

underwent transformations, which deleted certain items of the Deep Structure. In the

literature, it is argued that the items that were removed in such sentences are the pronoun you

which is the subject of the sentence and the relevant modal auxiliary. The foregoing means

that at the underlying construction the sentences read:

9. You will sweep the house

10. You will go to the school

11. You will do it now

12. You will go there.

The rule for deriving imperative sentences ispresented thus:

SD S

NP + Aux + VP

The deletion of the subjects of the sentences and their auxiliaries leave the sentences in an

imperative structure (Nwala, 2016a).

(b) Equi -NP Deletion

This is an obligatory transformation, which removes a noun, or a noun phrase (especially the

subject of an embedded infinitival clause), which is identical with another noun, or noun

phrase in the sentence:

13a Peace prefers - to love herself

14a Gloria pretended- to hate herself.

Indexed African Journals Online: www.ajol.info

Indexed Society of African Journals Editors (SAJE); https://africaneditors.org/

AFRREV VOL 14 (1), S/NO 57, JANUARY, 2020

Sentences 13a and 14a are surface structures of sentences 13b and 14b respectively:

13b. Peace prefers Peace to love herself

14b. Gloria pretended Gloria to hate herself.

The second Peace and Gloria in sentences 13b and 14b were deleted to derive sentences 13a

and 14a respectively because of their equivalent identity withthe first Peace and Gloria. The

deletion of the second Peace and Gloria via T-rule favours the argument that subjects of

infinitive clauses are not to be filled by any item with a phonetic shape; secondly, another

argument in favour of Peace and Gloria as the subject of the second clause of sentences 13a

and 14a is the usual co-referential relationship which exists between an antecedent and its

anaphor.

Anaphors and their antecedents as argued in the literature are usually clausemates; if Peace

and Gloria are not the underlying subjects of the second clauses of 12b and 13b, herself in

both second clauses will not have any antecedent that will license itsexistence, hence the

sentence is bound to be ill-formed (Ndimele, 1999,1996 ; Nwala 2016a).

(iii) Insertion

This is the transformational process that involves the inclusion of new constituents in a

construction. The insertion of new constituents usually helps in deriving sentences, which

would have been impossible. Passivization of active sentence involves obligatory insertion of

constituents that make the grammar possible.

Another example of insertion transformation process is the Do-support transformation. In any

sentence where an auxiliary is absent, it is always difficult to form a polar question from such

construction. To overcome such problem, the auxiliary Do is usually inserted in the Aux

node. The inserted Do thereafter inverts position with the subject of the sentence. As it (Do)

goes, it drags along the tense affix of the verb, thus, leaving the verb in its base form. This

transformational rule is a typical example of the principle of last resort introduced in the

Government and Binding grammar of 1980 by Chomsky.

Sentences 15b and 16b are the outputs of the Do-support insertion:

15a. John killed the dog

15b. Did John kill the dog?

16a. Jane abandoned James

16 b. Did Jane abandon James?

(iv) Substitution Transformation

This is the transformational process that copies the relevant constituent of a construction to

form a new one. Substitution or copying transformation is not a movement transformation per

se, but that which copies relevant constituents of a sentence.

A good example of substitution transformation is the tag question formation. The formation

of tag questions normally involves the pronominal copy of the subject and auxiliary elements

of an initial statement:

Sentence 17b - 19b are the outputs of the substitution transformation of sentences 17a-19a:

17a. She is coming

Indexed African Journals Online: www.ajol.info

Indexed Society of African Journals Editors (SAJE); https://africaneditors.org/

AFRREV VOL 14 (1), S/NO 57, JANUARY, 2020

17b She is coming, -isn't she?

18a. They did not come.

18b. They did not come, did they?

19a. We are reading

19b We are reading, aren't we?

The samples of transformations shown above allude to the position of scholars n the literature

that transformational rules change constructions to new ones.

Nwala (2016a, p. 144) clearly pointed to the above when he defines transformation as “the act

of rearranging or reordering items into other ways”. This means that a sentence or

construction can be represented or realized from an existing construction using the

transformational rules. The major function of the transformational rules is to convert abstract

deep structures that express the content of a sentence into a fairly concrete surface structures

that indicate their form (see also Chomsky, 1964). This simply means that transformational

rule act on initial constructions to convert them into new ones.

Mbah (2006) in his own opinion explained that transformational rules relate the changes at

the surface structure to those of the deep structure and reduce same to a minimum of rules. In

addition, Mbah noted that transformational grammar refers to a syntactic model, a level,

which contains all the phonological materials used in actual speech. The second level is the

deep structure. The deep structure according to Nwala (2016a), p. 141) is “an organization in

which all the elements determining structural interpretations are represented”. This means that

the idea of surface structure is embedded in the deep structure. Put differently, the surface

structure is the outward representation of the deep structure. That is, through the deep

structure, other sentences can be generated or derived.

From the foregoing, it is obvious that T-rules act on structures already generated by the rules

of the base to convert them into new structures. The usefulness of the transformational

grammar has always been its supports to the dynamic nature of language, as it brings to open

the stylistic and pragmatic beauty of language. Again it is argued in the literature that

transformational grammar was propounded by Noam Chomsky in 1957 in a thesis entitled

“Syntactic Structures” to remedy the short comings of the phrase structure grammar (PSG), (a

type of generative grammar also called, a rewritten rule grammar) used to specify or show

components of the sentence. The PSG according to Nwala (2016b) for example could not be

used to analyse mirror sentences; it could not explain that two sentences that are structurally

different may have the same underlying form; PSG could not be used to analyse ambiguous

sentences, that is, sentences that have more than one meaning among others. So, in

transformational grammar, both the observational and explanatory adequacies of language are

pursued, as the grammar tries to recognize two levels of linguistic analysis - the deep

structure and the surface structure.

Methodology

Research methodology is the science of methods and procedures used in any given analysis or

activity. It is a set of related principles, which are adopted to specify how to reach a particular

conclusion or achieve a given objective. This paper adopts the descriptive research design to

analyse the data got purposively from English texts and those of the Echie language supplied

by the author who is a competent speaker of Echie language.

Indexed African Journals Online: www.ajol.info

Indexed Society of African Journals Editors (SAJE); https://africaneditors.org/

AFRREV VOL 14 (1), S/NO 57, JANUARY, 2020

Data Analysis

1 Polar Question

In this type of question, it is expected that the respondent says either yes or no. In English, it

is observed in the literature (Nwala 2016a, Nwala 2016b, Mbah 2006, Ndimele 1999, Ore

1997), that polar questions are formed by swopping the position of the auxiliary of the

sentence with the subject of the sentence, hence, subject-auxiliary inversion. For example:

20a. They are singing

20b. Are they singing?

Polar questions in English are realized from underlying sentences which are usually in

declarative forms or statements through the action of transformation. The subject of the

sentence as noted above takes the position of the auxiliary verb while the auxiliary verb takes

the position of the subject. The following sentences give further clarification:

Underlying sentenceDerived polar questions

21. She is sweeping

Is she sweeping?

22. They are coming

Are they coming?

23. He is jumping

Is he jumping?

24. Princewill is going

Is Princewill going?

27. They were here

Were they here?

28. They have gone

Have they gone?

To convert the underlying sentences above that are in the declarative forms or statements, the

subjects of the sentences swop positions with those of the auxiliaries. In sentence 20a for

example, the subject swops position with the auxiliary, hence, the polar question in 20b. A

similar thing is noticed in sentences 21, 22, 23, 24, 25 and 26 where the subjects she, they, he,

Princewill, also swop position with the auxiliaries is, are, were, and have respectively.

But in Echie, there are two forms of polar question realizations. The emergence of a pronoun

popularly called a resumptive pronoun which occurs because of the backward movement of

the subject of the sentence to the position of COMP (a place agreed in the literature to be

outside the sentence boundary) and the emphatic yes or no question which is optionally

introduced by the use of the question trigger ò-bu (is it?). In what follows, we present both

types. We start with the resumptive pronoun type.

2. Resumptive Pronoun Type

Underlying

Derived polar question

29a. Kelechi jhèrèáhià

[Kelechi go-FT market]

29b.Kelechii òijhèrèáhià

[Kelechi resum.p. go-FT to market]

Kelechi went to market

Did Kelechi go to market

30a. Nwaforjhèrèúlò

30b. Nwaforiòijhèrèúlò

[Nwafor go-FT house]

Nwaforresum.p. go-FT house]

Nwafor went to the home

Did Nwafor go to the house

Indexed African Journals Online: www.ajol.info

Indexed Society of African Journals Editors (SAJE); https://africaneditors.org/

AFRREV VOL 14 (1), S/NO 57, JANUARY, 2020

31a. Chinedu nà Kelechi whnùrùòko 31b.Chinedu naKelechiiòiwhùrùwèòke?

[Chinedu conj. Kelechi see-FT rat] [Chinedu conj. Kelechi resum.p.

see-FT num. indc. rat]

Chinedu and Kelechi saw a rat

Did Chinedu and Kelechi see a rat?

The derived constructions above clearly show that the emergence of the pronoun ò is as a

result of the dislocation of the subjects of the sentences. The moved subjects and the

resumptive pronouns are co-indexed showing that they are co-referential, a situation where

the moved item is the binder, while the resumptive pronoun is the bindee.

3. The Emphatic Type

Unlike the resumptive pronoun type which is as a result of backward dislocation of the

subject of the sentence to the position of COMP, the emphatic type is optionally introduced

by ò-bu (is it?) known as the question trigger. It is a kind of polar question which has to do

with the truth or falsehood of an utterance. For example:

Underlying sentences

Derived (Emphatic polar question)

32a. Chidubemrìrìirnì

32b. ò-buChidubemrìrìirnì?

Chidubem eat-FT food]

[QT- Chidubem eat-FT food]

Chidubem ate the food

Was it Chidubem that ate the food?

33a. Gi naNwaforrìrìjì

33b. ò -buginàNwaforrìrìjì?

[You conjNwafor eat-FT yam [QT- you conjNwafor eat-FT yam]

You and Nwafor ate the yam

yam?

Was it you and Nwafor that ate the

34a. Chika biàrà

34b. ò -bu Chika biàrà?

[Chika come-FT]

[QT- Chika come-FT]

Chika came

Was it Chika that came?

The question trigger ò-bu (is it?) behaves like the resumptive pronoun ò since the question it

entails makes the respondent to answer either yes or no. But unlike the resumptive pronoun

type, the emphatic type puts the respondent almost in an instructive position — where he/she

is bound to say something. The question trigger, ò-bu [is it?] has some form of

communicative force which is absent in the ordinary Yes-No question type of the resumptive

pronoun.

Findings

Polar questions are realized from an underlying declarative sentence through the action of the

transformational rules. To realize this in English as the data above show, the subject of the

sentence takes or swops position with the auxiliary of the sentence.

But in Echie, there are two structural realizations: one, with the use of the resumptive

pronoun, ò which must obligatorily take a low tone; two, with the use of ò-bu, [is it], which

makes the question emphatic.

Indexed African Journals Online: www.ajol.info

Indexed Society of African Journals Editors (SAJE); https://africaneditors.org/

AFRREV VOL 14 (1), S/NO 57, JANUARY, 2020

The resumptive pronoun as shown in the analysis is co-indexed with the moved subject and

agreed in all grammatical features with it. The moved subject goes into the Comp position

[one which is outside the sentence boundary]. The sentence remains grammatical because the

subject moved into the new position with its grammatical features and is also co-indexed with

the resumtive pronoun. The resumptive pronoun ò have morpho-variant allomorphs which

agree in number and person with the antecedents. The question trigger, ò-bu makes the

construction to have some compelling force on the addressee, making it mandatory for

him/her to respond. What mentioning is the use of what we laballed “number indicator”, we,

which also adds strong responsive or mandatory pressure on the addressee in example 31b,

which was not observed in others. The use of the indicator shows the plurality of the subject

Conclusion

Thus far, we have examined the differences and similarities between polar question formation

in Echie and English respectively. Our description showed great structural syntactic contrast

in both languages. The English language forms her polar question through the parameter of

subject-auxiliary inversion but the Echie language realizes her polar question via the

emergence of a resumptive pronoun and the insertion of a question trigger ò-bu (is it?).

Moreso, the status of the resumptive pronoun ò as a product of movement was analysed. The

paper noted that the resumptive pronoun ò have morpho-variants, called allomorphs which

agree in number and person with the antecedents. The antecedents in the parlance of the

Government and Binding grammar governs and C-commands the anaphors. The left

dislocation of subject to the SPEC-C or TOP position, as noted by the paper is basically for

grammatical prominence

References

Anugbogu, P. N., Mbah, M. B. &Eme, C. A. (2001). Introduction to linguistics. Awka: J. F.

C. Limited.

Chomsky, N. (1957). Syntactic structures. Mouton: The Hague.

Chomsky, N. (1964). Aspect of the theory of syntax. Cambridge: The MIT Press

Corder, S. P. (1973). Introducing applied linguistics. Harmondsworth: Penguin

Emenanjo, E. N. 2015). A grammar of contemporary Igbo: Constituents, features and

processes. Port Harcourt: M&J grand orbit Communications Ltd

Fries, C. (1945). Teaching and learning English as a foreign language. Ann Harbour:

University of Michigan Press

Gass, S. &Selinker, L. (1994). Second language acquisition: An introductory course.

Hillsdale, N. J: Lawrence Eribuam

Klein, W. (1986). Second language acquisition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press

Lado, R. (1957). Linguistics across cultures. Ann Harbour: University of Michigan Press

Mbah, B. M. (2006). GB syntax: Theory and application to Igbo. Enugu: Association of

Nigerian Authors.

Ndimele, O. M. (1992). The parameters of universal grammar: A government and binding

approach. Owerri: African Educational service.

Indexed African Journals Online: www.ajol.info

Indexed Society of African Journals Editors (SAJE); https://africaneditors.org/

AFRREV VOL 14 (1), S/NO 57, JANUARY, 2020

Ndimele, O. M. (2003). A concise grammar and lexicon of Echie. Aba: National institute for

Nigeria language:

Nwala, M. A. (2016a). Introduction to syntax: The student’s guide (rev.ed.) Abakaliki:

Wisdom Publishers.

Nwala, M. A. (2016b). Introduction to linguistics: A first course (Rev.ed.)Port Harcourt:

Obisco Nig. Enterprises

Isaac, T. (2018). Applied linguistics: Teaching English as a language. Port Harcourt: Pearl

Publishers International Ltd

Scott, S. &Permutter, D. (1979). Syntactic argumentation and the structure of English.

Berkeley: University of California Press

Wilkins, D. A. (1972). Linguistics in language teaching. Mass: M. I.T. Press.

Indexed African Journals Online: www.ajol.info

Indexed Society of African Journals Editors (SAJE); https://africaneditors.org/