Focus in Ecuadorian Quechua

This paper provides a brief description of how pragmatically marked focus is encoded in Ecuadorian Quechua. 1 While this is a preliminary study based on data from one speaker, this variety of Quechua is under-documented, and this in-progress study is a contribution nonetheless Clauses with focus reveal pragmatic nuances that differ from other clause types. 2 I will illustrate the effects of focus by contrasting focused and unfocused sentences. Marked focus can occur in two different scopes. If the entire clause is focused, the scope is truth-value focus. 3 Example (1) shows an unfocused sentence, while (2) asserts the truth-value of the focused statement.


Focus in Ecuadorian Quechua
Joshua Shireman University of Kansas

Introduction
This paper provides a brief description of how pragmatically marked focus is encoded in Ecuadorian Quechua. 1 While this is a preliminary study based on data from one speaker, this variety of Quechua is under-documented, and this in-progress study is a contribution nonetheless Clauses with focus reveal pragmatic nuances that differ from other clause types. 2 I will illustrate the effects of focus by contrasting focused and unfocused sentences.
Marked focus can occur in two different scopes.If the entire clause is focused, the scope is truth-value focus. 3Example (1) shows an unfocused sentence, while (2) asserts the truth-value of the focused statement.
If a constituent smaller than a clause is focused, we describe it as constituent focus. 5This type of focusing serves to add emphasis, as illustrated below.In example (3), the adverb utkata, "quickly," is unfocused.In (4), it is focused.
(3) njuka utkata atʃku-ta kati-rka-ni.1sg quickly dog-ACC chase-PAST-1sg "I quickly chased the dog." (4) njuka utkata-mi atʃku-ta kati-rka-ni.1sg quickly-FOC dog-ACC chase-PAST-1sg "I quickly chased the dog." 1 I would like to acknowledge our Quechua consultant Rosa-Maria Masaquiza along with Dr. Harold Torrence and our Field Methods class in the spring of 2008 including Jose Aleman-Banon, Erik Christensen, Matthew Henderson, Ann Liggett, Khady Tamba and Mahira Yakup.All data was collected during the spring of 2008 through group and individual elicitations with our language consultant. 2 Payne.pp.268 3 Ibid pp.268 4 The examples in the paper are given using IPA rather than any official orthography. 5Ibid pp.268 At present, we have identified several morphosyntactic structures that can be used for focus.These focusing methods include affix addition (primarily -mi, -ka, -tʃu,), negation positioning, clefting, fronting, and intonation.I outline each of these methods in the following sections.
Note that previous research of Ecuadorian Quechua is not plentiful.The description in Carpenter 1982, a reference grammar, is based on an overview of Quechua dialects; it is not specific to the one described here.Throughout, I compare and contrast Carpenter's data with my own data, which was elicited through work with a native speaker consultant.

Affixes
In this section, we will discuss how affixes are used to focus constituents.The affixes we will investigate are -mi, -ka, -ʒa-mi, -piʃ.

Non-verbal usage of -mi
In Carpenter's book, the morpheme -mi is described as a "witness" particle, implying that the speaker was a witness to an event.It may also be used to express certainty.This can be seen in example ( 5), where the speaker had witnessed the event and is making an observation.
(5) [w]armi-kuna-mi women-PL-WITNESS It is the women.6 In addition, Carpenter describes it as the marker for information that is the answer to a question.This is shown in examples ( 6) and ( 7).
(7) ari [nj]uka-mi.yes 1sg-FOC Yes, it's mine. 7rpenter describes -mi as a "witness" particle, but this contrasts with our study because we found that -mi could be used regardless of whether the speaker had witnessed an event.Instead, this affix served to emphasize or highlight the constituent to which it was attached.Furthermore, the native speaker we worked with described it as an emphatic particle.
The particle -mi is allowed to function in only one type of structure in a sentence.In example (8), the presence of -mi on both the subject and object of the sentence make it ungrammatical.
(8) *njuka-mi atʃku-ta-mi kati-rka-ni.1sg-FOC dog-ACC-FOC chase-PAST-1sg This supports the claim that -mi is a focus particle rather than a "witness" particle.When -mi occurs on words in one grammatical category, such as the nominative subject in example (8), the particle cannot be attached to any objects or to the verb.This is particularly interesting given that the suffix can serve both functions described above; it can be used to convey truth-value focus, emphasizing that the statement is true, or to achieve constituent focus, emphasizing that a particular constituent in a statement is true.In each case, the -mi morpheme is attached terminally after all other suffixes.Both subjects and objects can be focused using the -mi morpheme.This is shown in examples ( 9) through (11) below.By comparing ( 9) with ( 10) and ( 11), we see the unfocused sentence (9) with the focus on the subject (10) as well as the object (11).( 9 In these cases, the information in focus can be the desired answer to a question or new information in the clause.It can also be used contrastively, showing that it was a dog that was chased, not something else.
Only the noun in a DP can take this focus.Numbers and adjectives in DPs cannot be focused in this way, as illustrated in the examples below.
(12) atʃku-kuna-ka wawa yurax misi-ta kati-rka.dog-PL-TOP young white cat-ACC chase-PAST.3sg"The dogs chased the young, white cat" (13) *atʃku-kuna-ka wawa-mi yurax misi-ta kati-rka.13) and ( 14) show that adjectives in DPs cannot take the -mi particle.These are focused using intonation rather than a particle.It is not clear in (15) whether the entire DP is focused or solely misi "cat", or if both are possibilities.
It is also ungrammatical to affix this particle to WH-question words. ( Example ( 16) already contains a focused WH-question word, ima.This blocks further focusing with -mi, as seen in ( 17).
Adpositions can be focused, however, by adding -mi after the postposition as in ( 19): (18) kamu-ka pataku-pi.book-TOP The focus resulting from this suffixation occurs naturally in a response to a question, as seen in ( 20) and ( 21) (20) kamu-ka maɪpitaŋ.book-TOP where "Where is the book?" (21) kaɪ-pi-mi kamux.here-on.PP-FOC book "The book is here." The conclusion that can be drawn from the data presented above is that our research confirms Carpenter's claim-that -mi is used in focusing answers to wh-questions.

Verbal and predicate usage of -mi
There seem to be two main scopes of focus which can be achieved through affixation of -mi on the verb.One is truth-value focus and the other is constituent focus.The examples below illustrate constituent focus.
In order to differentiate between constituent and truth-value focus usage of -mi, context is essential.As we see below in ( 25) and ( 26), the same addition of -mi expresses truth-value focus rather than constituent focus.
(25) wawa-kuna katuna wasi-maŋ ʒi-rka-kuna child-PL market house-DAT go-PAST-3pl "The children went to the market."(26) wawa-kuna katuna wasi-maŋ ʒi-rka-kuna-mi child-PL market house-DAT go-PAST-3pl-FOC "The children did go to the market." Thus positive truth-value focus is achieved simply through suffixing -mi to the verb in an appropriate context.As seen in both ( 23) and ( 26) this verbal suffixation can either convey focus or assert truth value depending on the context.
In a sentence that contains an imperative with an embedded clause, -mi is blocked on the imperative: ( As we see from ( 32) and ( 33), -mi conveys only constituent focus when affixed to adjectival predicates.Furthermore, as shown in (34), it can appear twice when modifying coordinated adjectives.
(34) paɪ-ka sumaɣ-piʃ-mi kwiʒa-piʃ-mi 3sg-TOP beautiful-CONJ-FOC nice-CONJ-FOC "She is beautiful and nice." Adverbial time expressions can also be suffixed with -mi.As represented in (35), this simply indicates that that word is the important or new information in the clause, rendering this another example of constituent focus.
(35) kaɪna-mi njukantʃix-ka atʃku-ta kati-rka-ŋtʃix mana kunaŋka.yesterday-FOC 1pl-TOP dog-ACC chase-PAST-1pl NEG TODAY "Yesterday, not today, we chased the dog" Overall, then, the "witness" terminology used by Carpenter does not fit with the data outlined above.The speaker cited herein can use this particle when referring to situations that she did not experience firsthand.Its primary use seems to be as a focus particle, as shown through the investigations above.

-ka
Carpenter describes -ka as a topic and focus particle.This morpheme is a suffix and attaches both to the nominative and accusative cases as shown in examples ( 36) and (37) respectively: (36) paɪ-ka rasu-ta jakuja-tʃi-rka.3sg-TOP ice-ACC melt-PAST-1sg "He melted the ice."(37) atʃku-ta-ka njuka kati-rka-ni dog-ACC-TOP 1sg-NOM melt-PAST-1sg "It is the dog I chased." The -ka particle can also appear in a sentence with -mi: (38) paɪ-ka sumaɣ-mi.3sg-TOP beautiful-FOC "She is beautiful." Example (38) suggests that -ka is likely not a focus particle, because it appears with -mi.The sentence already contains focus, expressed with -mi; -ka, on the other hand, seems to act as a topic marker rather than a focus particle.Speaker intuitions about the interpretation of (38) seem to indicate that -ka marks the topic of discourse while -mi is used to focus new information about that topic.
Recall that it is grammatical to use -mi multiple, as shown in (34).This was only in a coordinated phrase, however, and it is in fact ungrammatical to affix both -mi and -ka on the same DP, as shown below.Examples (39) through (41) show that -ka and -mi cannot cooccur on a single constituent.The appearance of one of these particles blocks the appearance of the other.In many instances whenka appears, it cannot be focused because of the presence of -mi on a different constituent.This initial analysis is limited, yet indications thus seem to affirm Carpenter's claim that -ka is a topic particle, but contradict the claim that it focuses.

-tʃu
A constituent in an affirmative question is focused by affixing the morpheme - In (42), we see that the focus is on the entire copula clause when the morpheme is affixed to the verb.This could function either as constituent focus or as truth-value focus of this particular statement, and is interpreted contextually.In ( 43), the focus is put on the adjective by moving the -tʃu to that position.The -tʃu in (44) focuses the adverb very.Finally the DP is focused in (45), and the appearance of -ka is blocked by that of -tʃu as evidenced in ( 46).This is consistent with the pattern observed with the particle -mi.

Negation placement
Focus in negative sentences is achieved through placement of the negative morpheme mana.
Starting with a simple unfocused sentence in (47), we can focus the subject as in (48), or the object as in (49).
(47) njuka atʃku-ta mana kati-rka-ni-tʃu.These data illustrate that mana focuses the element that immediately follows it.Example (47) can interpreted as either unfocused or with truth-value focus.
In the case of negative sentences, -mi is blocked by mana as shown in example (50).
NEG 1sg-FOC dog-ACC chase-PAST-1sg-NEG "It is not I who chased the dog." Our speaker said that generally -mi cannot go along with mana, but she would not say it was never used in negative cases.

Clefts and fronting
A cleft is a predicate nominal that has a DP and a relative clause with a DP that is co-referential with the afore-mentioned DP. 8 There are examples in Quechua that suggest the existence of both pseudo-cleft and cleft constructions, but there is limited data in this area.In (51), we see an example of what may be a pseudo-cleft.
(51) waɣra-ka kaɪ ima sara-ta-mi miku-rka-kuna.cow-TOP DET thing corn-ACC-FOC eat-PAST-3pl "The cows are the ones who ate the corn." This data is similar to the English pseudo-cleft construction.It follows the structure of a predicate nominative clause where the predicate is a relative clause that co-refers to the subject of the initial NP.This construction focuses on the subject of the NP, which is waGra in this case.This construction has not been fully investigated and more time and research is needed to confirm that this is a pseudo-cleft.
Word order in Quechua is somewhat free because of the inflected constituents.This flexibility means that some structures are translated into English with focus conveyed through the use of fronting or clefting in the translation.This is demonstrated in ( 52) and ( 53), where the object appears in front of the subject.The focused meaning that results can be conveyed in alternate ways in the English translation, as shown in these data.
(54) atʃku-ta-mi njuka kati-rka-ni.dog-ACC-FOC 1sg chase-PAST-1sg "It is a dog I chased."This is likely not clefting due to the lack of an initial pronoun; rather, it should be considered fronting because of the movement of the object to before the subject.
There is another type of movement which can be used to achieve focus, this one involving the verb.In intransitive sentences, the verb can be moved to the front to give emphasis or focus to the subject of the sentence.This is demonstrated in (55).
(55) kalpa-rka paɪ run-PAST.3sg3sg "He ran" Examples ( 56) and ( 57) show that this is allowed with transitive verbs only when a previously mentioned subject or object is deleted.

Intonation
For a variety of reasons which are not yet fully understood, some items cannot be focused with particles.Instead, these items are focused through an alteration of the typical stress pattern.This altered stress is perceived mainly as a change in intonation.Quechua typically has penultimate stress; focus intonation is achieved through the addition of stronger than usual penultimate stress, as shown in the examples below.In (60), focus on the personal pronoun may be achieved by heavily stressing the penultimate syllable, indicated here through the use of bold text.What we see in ( 61) is that use of the focus particle is not allowed on this possessive; this means that intonation is the only way to grammatically focus this particular constituent.The nuances of intonation when used for focusing purposes were not explored in this study, so more cannot be said on the topic at this point.It is clearly one means of achieving focus, however, and as such deserves investigation in future work.

Conclusion
The overall picture of focus in Quechua is becoming clearer.Speakers use many different ways to focus constituents.The use of the particles -mi, -tʃu, and placement of the negative morpheme mana, serve to focus constituents and may also be used to assert the truth-value of an utterance.The particle -ka appears to be a topic marker rather than a focus particle.There are constructions similar to English pseudo-clefting and fronting that are used to focus constituents.One interesting feature of the focusing system is the movement of the verb in front of a subject or an object in order to focus that constituent.
All of these areas need more complete study to understand the morpho-syntactic rules which constrain the occurrence and co-occurrence of these particles.Areas for future research include more thorough investigation into clefts, fronting, and intonation, as well as a complete comparison of how -mi, -tʃu, and mana differ in their usage to focus constituents in differing types of sentences and clauses.