Morphological type Quechua is an
agglutinating language, meaning that words are built up from basic roots followed by several
suffixes, each of which carries one meaning. Their large number of
suffixes changes both the overall meaning of words and their subtle shades of meaning. All varieties of Quechua are very regular agglutinative languages, as opposed to
isolating or
fusional ones [Thompson]. Their normal sentence order is SOV (
subject–object–verb). Notable grammatical features include bipersonal
conjugation (verbs agree with both subject and object),
evidentiality (indication of the source and veracity of knowledge), a set of
topic particles, and suffixes indicating who benefits from an action and the speaker's attitude toward it, but some varieties may lack some of the characteristics.
Pronouns In Quechua, there are seven
pronouns, gender distinction does not exist. First-person plural pronouns (equivalent to "we") may be
inclusive or exclusive; which mean, respectively, that the
addressee ("you") is or is not part of the "we". Quechua also adds the suffix
-kuna to the second and third person singular pronouns
qam and
pay to create the plural forms,
qam-kuna and
pay-kuna. In Quechua IIB, or "Kichwa", the exclusive first-person plural pronoun, "ñuqayku", is generally obsolete.
Adjectives Adjectives in Quechua are always placed before nouns and are invariable.
Numbers •
Cardinal numbers. ''ch'usaq
(0), huk
(1), iskay
(2), kimsa
(3), tawa
(4), pichqa
(5), suqta
(6), qanchis
(7), pusaq
(8), isqun
(9), chunka
(10), chunka hukniyuq
(11), chunka iskayniyuq
(12), iskay chunka
(20), pachak
(100), waranqa
(1,000), hunu
(1,000,000), lluna'' (1,000,000,000,000, i.e. a
trillion). • Ordinal numbers. To form ordinal numbers, the word
ñiqin is put after the appropriate cardinal number (
iskay ñiqin = "second"). The only exception is that, in addition to
huk ñiqin ("first"), the phrase
ñawpaq is also used in the somewhat more restricted sense of "the initial, primordial, the oldest".
Nouns Like pronouns, they are genderless. There are no articles either.
Noun roots accept suffixes that indicate
number,
case, and the
person of a
possessor. In general, the possessive suffix precedes that of number. In the
Santiago del Estero variety, however, the order is reversed. From variety to variety, suffixes may change. The use of the
-kuna plural suffix is largely facultative in nouns, like in many languages where number indication is optional.
Adverbs Adverbs can be formed by adding
-ta or, in some cases,
-lla to an adjective:
allin – allinta ("good – well"),
utqay – utqaylla ("quick – quickly"). They are also formed by adding suffixes to
demonstratives:
chay ("that") –
chaypi ("there"),
kay ("this") –
kayman ("hither"). There are several original adverbs. For Europeans, it is striking that the adverb
qhipa means both "behind" and "future" and
ñawpa means "ahead, in front" and "past". Local and temporal concepts of adverbs in Quechua (as well as in
Aymara) are associated to each other reversely, compared to European languages. For the speakers of Quechua, we are moving backwards into the future (we cannot see it: it is unknown), facing the past (we can see it: it is remembered).
Verbs The
infinitive forms have the suffix
-y (e.g.''., much'a'' 'kiss'; ''much'a-y'' 'to kiss'). These are the typical endings for the
indicative in a Southern Quechua (IIC) dialect: The suffixes shown in the table above usually indicate the
subject; the person of the
object is also indicated by a suffix, which precedes the suffixes in the table. For the second person, it is
-su-, and for the first person, it is
-wa- in most Quechua II dialects. In such cases, the plural suffixes from the table (
-chik and
-ku) can be used to express the number of the object rather than the subject. There is a lot of variation between the dialects in the exact rules which determine this. In Central Quechua, however, the verbal morphology differs in a number of respects: most notably, the verbal plural suffixes
-chik and
-ku are not used, and plurality is expressed by different suffixes that are located
before rather than after the personal suffixes. Furthermore, the 1st person singular object suffix is
-ma-, rather than
-wa-.
Grammatical particles Particles are indeclinable: they do not accept suffixes. They are relatively rare, but the most common are
arí 'yes' and
mana 'no', although
mana can take some suffixes, such as
-n/
-m (
manan/
manam),
-raq (
manaraq 'not yet') and
-chu (
manachu? 'or not?'), to intensify the meaning. Other particles are
yaw 'hey, hi', and certain loan words from Spanish, such as
piru (from Spanish
pero 'but') and
sinuqa (from
sino 'rather').
Evidentiality The Quechuan languages have three different morphemes that mark
evidentiality. Evidentiality refers to a morpheme whose primary purpose is to indicate the source of information. In Quechuan languages, evidentiality is a three-term system: there are three evidential morphemes that mark varying levels of source information. The markers can apply to first, second, and third persons. The chart below depicts an example of these morphemes from
Wanka Quechua: DIR:direct evidence CONJ:conjecture The parentheses around the vowels indicate that the vowel can be dropped when following an open vowel. For the sake of cohesiveness, the above forms are used to discuss the evidential morphemes. There are dialectal variations to the forms. The variations will be presented in the following descriptions. The following sentences provide examples of the three evidentials and further discuss the meaning behind each of them.
-m(i) : Direct evidence and commitment Regional variations: In
Cusco Quechua, the direct evidential presents itself as
–mi and
–n. The evidential
–mi indicates that the speaker has a "strong personal conviction the veracity of the circumstance expressed." It has the basis of direct personal experience. Wanka Quechua {{interlinear|indent=3
-chr(a) : Inference and attenuation In Quechuan languages, not specified by the source, the inference morpheme appears as
-ch(i), -ch(a), -chr(a). The
-chr(a) evidential indicates that the utterance is an inference or form of conjecture. That inference relays the speaker's non-commitment to the truth-value of the statement. It also appears in cases such as acquiescence, irony, interrogative constructions, and first person inferences. These uses constitute nonprototypical use and will be discussed later in the
changes in meaning and other uses section. Wanka Quechua {{interlinear|indent=3
-sh(i) : Hearsay Regional variations: It can appear as
–sh(i) or
–s(i) depending on the dialect. With the use of this morpheme, the speaker "serves as a conduit through which information from another source passes." The information being related is hearsay or revelatory in nature. It also works to express the uncertainty of the speaker regarding the situation. However, it also appears in other constructions that are discussed in the
changes in meaning section. Wanka Quechua {{interlinear|indent=3 Hintz discusses an interesting case of evidential behavior found in the Sihaus dialect of
Ancash Quechua. The author postulates that instead of three single evidential markers, that Quechuan language contains three pairs of evidential markers.
Affix or clitic The evidential morphemes have been referred to as markers or morphemes. The literature seems to differ on whether or not the evidential morphemes are acting as affixes or clitics, in some cases, such as Wanka Quechua, enclitics. Lefebvre and Muysken (1998) discuss this issue in terms of case but remark the line between affix and clitic is not clear. Both terms are used interchangeably throughout these sections.
Position in the sentence Evidentials in the Quechuan languages are "second position enclitics", which usually attach to the first constituent in the sentence, as shown in this example. {{interlinear|indent=3 They can, however, also occur on a focused constituent. {{interlinear|indent=3 Sometimes, the affix is described as attaching to the focus, particularly in the Tarma dialect of
Yaru Quechua, but this does not hold true for all varieties of Quechua. In Huanuco Quechua, the evidentials may follow any number of topics, marked by the topic marker
–qa, and the element with the evidential must precede the main verb or be the main verb. However, there are exceptions to that rule, and the more topics there are in a sentence, the more likely the sentence is to deviate from the usual pattern. {{interlinear|indent=3
Changes in meaning and other uses Evidentials can be used to relay different meanings depending on the context and perform other functions. The following examples are restricted to Wanka Quechua.
The direct evidential, -mi The direct evidential appears in wh-questions and yes/no questions. By considering the direct evidential in terms of prototypical semantics, it seems somewhat counterintuitive to have a direct evidential, basically an evidential that confirms the speaker's certainty about a topic, in a question. However, if one focuses less on the structure and more on the situation, some sense can be made. The speaker is asking the addressee for information so the speaker assumes the addressee knows the answer. That assumption is where the direct evidential comes into play. The speaker holds a certain amount of certainty that the addressee will know the answer. The speaker interprets the addressee as being in "direct relation" to the proposed content; the situation is the same as when, in regular sentences, the speaker assumes direct relation to the proposed information. The direct evidential affix is also seen in yes/no questions, similar to the situation with wh-questions. Floyd describes yes/no questions as being "characterized as instructions to the addressee to assert one of the propositions of a disjunction." Once again, the burden of direct evidence is being placed on the addressee, not on the speaker. The question marker in Wanka Quechua,
-chun, is derived from the negative –chu marker and the direct evidential (realized as –n in some dialects).
Inferential evidential, -chr(a) While
–chr(a) is usually used in an inferential context, it has some non-prototypical uses.
Mild Exhortation In these constructions the evidential works to reaffirm and encourage the addressee's actions or thoughts. This example comes from a conversation between husband and wife, discussing the reactions of their family and friends after they have been gone for a while. The husband says he plans to stretch the truth and tell them about distant places to which he has gone, and his wife (in the example above) echoes and encourages his thoughts.
Acquiescence With these, the evidential is used to highlight the speaker's assessment of inevitability of an event and acceptance of it. There is a sense of resistance, diminished enthusiasm, and disinclination in these constructions. This example comes from a discourse where a woman demands compensation from the man (the speaker in the example) whose pigs ruined her potatoes. He denies the pigs as being his but finally realizes he may be responsible and produces the above example.
Interrogative Somewhat similar to the
–mi evidential, the inferential evidential can be found in content questions. However, the salient difference between the uses of the evidentials in questions is that in the
–m(i) marked questions, an answer is expected. That is not the case with
–chr(a) marked questions.
Irony Irony in language can be a somewhat complicated topic in how it functions differently in languages, and by its semantic nature, it is already somewhat vague. For these purposes, it is suffice to say that when irony takes place in Wanka Quechua, the
–chr(a) marker is used. This example comes from discourse between a father and daughter about her refusal to attend school. It can be interpreted as a genuine statement (perhaps one can learn by resisting school) or as an ironic statement (that is an absurd idea).
Hearsay evidential, -sh(i) Aside from being used to express hearsay and revelation, this affix also has other uses.
Folktales, myths, and legends Because folktales, myths, and legends are, in essence, reported speech, it follows that the hearsay marker would be used with them. Many of these types of stories are passed down through generations, furthering this aspect of reported speech. A difference between simple hearsay and folktales can be seen in the frequency of the
–sh(i) marker. In normal conversation using reported speech, the marker is used less, to avoid redundancy.
Riddles Riddles are somewhat similar to myths and folktales in that their nature is to be passed by word of mouth. {{interlinear|indent=3
Omission and overuse of evidential affixes In certain grammatical structures, the evidential marker does not appear at all. In all Quechuan languages the evidential will not appear in a dependent clause. No example was given to depict this omission. Omissions occur in Quechua. The sentence is understood to have the same evidentiality as the other sentences in the context. Quechuan speakers vary as to how much they omit evidentials, but they occur only in connected speech. An interesting contrast to omission of evidentials is overuse of evidentials. If a speaker uses evidentials too much with no reason, competence is brought into question. For example, the overuse of –m(i) could lead others to believe that the speaker is not a native speaker or, in some extreme cases, that one is mentally ill. Evidentials also show that being precise and stating the source of one's information is extremely important in the language and the culture. Failure to use them correctly can lead to diminished standing in the community. Speakers are aware of the evidentials and even use proverbs to teach children the importance of being precise and truthful. Precision and information source are of the utmost importance. They are a powerful and resourceful method of human communication. ==Literature==