Infixation and Circumfixation Process: Unraveling Some Intricacies of Lexeme-Formation Processes in Hausa and English Languages

Cite this article as: Maikwai I.I & Oreoluwa S.A (2025). Infixation and Circumfixation Process: Unraveling Some Intricacies of Lexeme-Formation Processes in Hausa and English Languages. Zamfara International Journal of Humanities,3(3), 97-106. www.doi.org/10.36349/zamijoh.2025.v03i03.011

INFIXATION AND CIRCUMFIXATION PROCESS: UNRAVELING SOME INTRICACIES OF LEXEME-FORMATION PROCESSES IN HAUSA AND ENGLISH LANGUAGES

Idris. Ishaka Maikwai
Zamfara State University Talata Mafara

And

Solomon A. Oreoluwa
Federal University Dutsin Ma, Katsina

Abstract: Two socio-culturally linked languages are often juxtaposed to ascertain their areas of convergence and divergence. The similarities or differences could be in the area of phonology, morphology, syntax or semantics. A study of this nature can help in explicating reasons behind some difficulties often encountered by second language learners. It may also help in guiding teachers to understand the peculiarities of a target language, especially when the comparison is done between a foreign language and an indigenous language. This paper is therefore aimed at juxtaposing one of the most productive lexeme-formation processes (affixation) in Hausa and English languages to ascertain their areas of convergence and divergence, particularly in the area of infixes and circumfixes. It shall specifically shed some light on the intricacies surrounding the two processes (infixation and circumfixation) which have triggered misconceptions among linguistic scholars. Some researchers are of the view that Hausa language lacks infixation process, while others have argued with convincing facts that the process exists in the language. Moreover, some scholars are of the view that Hausa does not exhibit instances of circumfixation as it is predominantly used in English language. Using descriptive linguistic approach, Contrastive Analysis Theory was adopted in this study to ascertain the areas of convergence and divergence as regard the two processes in Hausa and English languages. Based on the data collated and analyzed, this research has revealed that Hausa has instances of infixation process which appears to be rich and highly productive. The study has further confirmed that the instances of circumfixation are even more productive and formal in Hausa than in English language.

Keywords: Lexeme-formation, infixation, circumfixation, English, Hausa.

Introduction

Language is an essential means of relating feelings and ideas to other individuals. It is a tool for the functioning of every human society and an institution through which humans communicate and interact with one another by means of habitually used oral-auditory arbitrary symbols (Hall, 1964). It can also be seen as a purely human and non-instinctive method of communicating ideas, emotions, and desires by means of voluntarily produced symbols which are auditory and produced by the organs of speech. This further explains why Bloch and Tragger, cited in Lyons (2002), who postulate that “language is a system of arbitrary vocal symbols by means of which a social group cooperates”.

Furthermore, languages of the world have differences in terms of their morphological processes and the rules governing their word formation processes like English and Hausa. Hausa language differs from English language in many ways. This could therefore lead to a linguistic situation of inter-lingual errors emanating from mother tongue interference in the target language. The areas of commonalities could aid learning as proposed in contrastive analysis while areas of differences could pose challenges L2 learning.

This paper therefore aims at comparing the affixation process in Hausa and English languages to unravel some controversies related to infixation and circumfixation processes which appear to be intricate. This can be successfully achieved using contrastive analysis approach. The idea of contrasting two socio-culturally linked languages was first conceived and proposed by Fries (1945) who opined that “the most effective materials in teaching foreign language are those that are based upon a scientific description of the language to be learned (L2), carefully compared with a parallel description of the native language of the learner (L1)”.

Review of Related Literature

Hausa Language

The term ‘Hausa’ refers to the name of a language, while the native speakers of the language are referred to as Hausawa. The origin of Hausa has been a contentious issues for decades. There are many theories regarding the origin of the language as well as the history of the people who use the language. Some scholars attributed the origin of Hausa and its people to Bayajida, an Arabian warrior who came to Africa and had contact with Daura in his expedition. Other scholars attributed the origin to Lake Chad and its surrounding communities. More theories evolved as the debate continues to linger.

However, most of the scholars who speculate on its origin agree that Hausa ethnic composition includes a Hamitic element. One of the theories widely regarded as more convincing is that of Palmer (1967) which postulates that Hausa people developed from the mixture of people migrating from central Sahara (due to desertification) to central Savannah in the south during the 1st millennium C.E. The new group which emerged out of that contact was relatively more sophisticated and later on absorbed a number of other small ethnic groups, all constituting together one cultural and linguistic entity, with Hausa language as a unifying factor. Therefore, the term Hausa in actual fact, is more a linguistic than ethnic term and the people can be regarded as a nation rather than a tribe. This assertion appears more convincing in addition to the fact that many researchers concluded that Hausa language is a member of Chadic branch of the Afro-Asiatic phylum with Gwandara and more closely related groups like Bole, Ron, Bade, Warji and Angas. What sets Hausa apart from its sister (or cousin) languages is the richness of its vocabulary, due in large part to the enormous number of loanwords from other languages, such as Tuareg and Kanuri, and classical Arabic (Newman, 1996).

Spoken by over 80 million people, Hausa language is the first lingua franca of West Africa (Lan, 2007). The Hausa migrations for the purposes of trade, pilgrimage and preaching of Islam led to the spread of their language beyond the original homeland (Hausaland: present Nigeria and Niger Republic). Also, it is spoken as a mother tongue by some 25 to 30 million people representing the original Hausa population as well as by people of Fulani ancestry who established political control over Hausaland at the beginning of the nineteenth century (Newman, 1996). It is the major language of most of northern Nigerian population and of the Republic of Niger. It also has a significant presence in Ghana, Chad, Togo, Central African Republic, Cameroon, southern Libya and Sudan and is also spoken as far as Ethiopia and Saudi Arabia.

Moreover, Hausa is also widely spoken as a second (or third) language in Nigeria and Niger, functioning as a lingua franca for commercial, informational and governmental purposes. It is one of the three indigenous national languages recognized in the Nigerian constitution. Whereas secondary and higher education in northern Nigeria generally use English as language of instruction, Hausa is commonly the de facto language of instruction in the early primary schools. It is now offered as a major degree subject in a number of Nigerian universities and even beyond. There are many Hausa language newspapers and magazines, a thriving literature and extensive use of the language on radio and television stations. Hausa language broadcasting is provided not only within Nigeria and Niger, but also by international transmissions from Britain, the USA, Germany, France, Russia, Turkey and China. With its growing popularity, permeation and acceptability, Hausa ranks with Swahili as one of the two most important languages in sub-Saharan Africa (Newman, 1996).

Unlike other African languages, Hausa dialectal variation is relatively modest. However, on the basis of grammar and pronunciation, it is possible to distinguish a Western dialects and Eastern dialects. Western dialects (Banza Bakwai) comprise dialects of Sokoto, Gobir, Kabbi, and Zamfara among others. While Eastern dialects (Hausa Bakwai) include dialects of Kano, Zaria, Katsina, Daura and so on. The dialect that became so established and described as standard Hausa is that of Kano, even though some linguistic inputs from Zaria dialect and few others were equally coded in the so called standard Hausa. Therefore, all the instances of Hausa lexeme formation processes in this research were drawn from the standard Hausa. (Newman, 1990)

English language

Etymologically, English language belongs to Indo-European family which includes most of the languages in Europe. Within the Indo-European family, are other sub-groups called Italic and Germanic. Germanic is also known as Teutonic. Latin and French developed from Italic at different times. The Germanic group has three branches namely North Germanic, East Germanic, and West Germanic (Efe, 2009). It is not certain whether North, East and West Germanic represent actual languages. The North Germanic is the group where we find language like Danish, Swedish, Norwegian and Icelandic. The West Germanic group developed into modern German, Dutch, Frisian and English (Efe, 2009). In this group are still other sub-groups, namely High West Germanic and the Low West Germanic due to their grammatical features. Both English and Frisian belong to the Low West Germanic and are therefore the closest of relatives. Frisian is spoken in North-west Netherlands. When languages belong to one linguistic ‘family’, it means that they share essential similarities in grammar and in their stock of words. English was separated from its Germanic root when some Germanic tribes: the Angles, the Saxons and the Jutes migrated from their original home in North-western Europe to Britain, and English language began to develop into an independent language with new characteristics distinct from other Germanic languages.

English is regarded as a global language because of its global acceptability, comprehensibility and wide coverage. This may not be unconnected to the active involvement of its native speakers in colonialism, global politics, industrialization and scientific discoveries.

In Nigeria, English language is a second language. It came through a language contact situation, and when two languages meet, two cultures must also meet because the culture of the people is embedded in the language. A lot of activities led to implantation of English language in Nigeria such as the boom in slave trade and the monopoly enjoyed by England along the West Coast of Africa set the stage for easy permeation and the use of English along the West coast and its land, including Nigeria. This contact situation between Portuguese, English and indigenous Nigerian languages, resulted in the birth of pidgin. In other words, slave trade activities enhanced not only the spread of English in Nigeria but the emergence of English Pidgin. The spread of English was also enhanced by the native indigenous interpreters, many of whom were trained abroad, and later served as professional interpreters to slave traders and ship captains (Efe, 2020).

Ironically, the spread of English in Nigeria was also enhanced with the abolition of slave trade. Free slaves who had learnt some English returned to their original houses in West Africa and were able to introduce the language; and such places include Nigeria. Some of the free slaves had received formal education in English (Efe, 2020). Later on, many of the freed slaves were employed by the missionaries, trading companies and British colonial administrators either as messengers, interpreters, and clerks and even as teachers. It is the language of government, education, commerce and industry. It is the language of mass media, international communication, science and technology as well as social interactions. The influence of English language in Nigeria cannot be overemphasized. Its dominance in all the nooks and crannies of the country led to the emergence of Nigerian English, Nigerian pidgin and creole. It is regarded as a global language with international acceptability and a lingua franca in Nigeria.

Affixes in Hausa and English Morphology: An Overview

In affixal morphology, the permissible operations are primarily based on a prefix and suffix, plus two less common affixes, i.e. an infix and circumfix (Crystal 2008; Haspelmath & Sims 2010; Aronoff & Fudeman, 2011). Even the so-called infix and circumfix are very rare among the languages of the world; for, there are only few languages that have either one of the two or both as morphological processes. Quirk et. al point out ‘affixation’ as one of the chief processes of English word-formation (1978). It has been observed, therefore, that English exhibits categories of affixes which are far more than that of Hausa. English uses affixes like prefixes, suffixes or postfixes, infixes, circumfixes, interfixes, duplifixes, transfixes, simulfixes, suprafixes and difixes (Aronoff & Fudeman, 2011).

Elson Benjamin and Pickett Velma who observe that “several kinds of affixes can be recognized depending on the way they occur with roots” (1976). Based on that, Robins (2010), Matthews (1997) and Crystal (1985) agreed that in English, affixes are divided into prefixes, suffixes and infixes. In another development, Elson and Pickett (1976) classify affixal morphemes based on their physical position relative to roots as prefixes, suffixes, infixes, suprafixes and simulfixes. According to Elson and Pickett, prefixes occur before roots; suffixes occur after roots, infixes occur inside the roots themselves (that is inside the words).

Even in Hausa, scholars have divergent views on the types of affixes which are highlighted below:

·         Two types of affixes i.e. prefix and suffix: as found in the works of Schön (1862), Bergery (1934), Abraham (1959) Jinju (1980) and Smirnova (1982);

·         Three types of affixes i.e. prefix, suffix and infix: as seen from the works of Rufa’i (1979), Bagari (1986), Newman (2000), Abubakar (2001), Fagge (2004), Sani (2002, 2009) and Al-Hassan (2011a);

·         Four types of affixes i.e. prefix, suffix, infix and circumfix: as explored in the works of Newman (2000), Umar (2008), and Inuwa (2017);

·         Five types of affixes i.e. prefix, suffix, infix, circumfix and transfix: as reviewed from the works of Newman (2000), Umar (2008, 2020) and Al-Hassan (2011b).

From the above classifications of affixes in both Hausa and English languages, it can be observed that both Hausa and English have many types of affixes in common but this paper is more interested in two processes (infixation and circumfixation) which are evidently common in both languages.

Different researchers and linguists alike have wondered whether these two morphological processes exist in both Hausa and English. The argument is more apparent in the case of Hausa language in which some researchers ruled out the possibility of having infixation and circumfixation processes in the language. For instance:

Al-Hassan argues that Hausa does not have infix as a morphological process. To support his thesis, Al-Hassan debates that either due to some erroneous analysis or faulty descriptions some ‘Hausaists’ confuse transfixation for infixation. (2011b) Also, Bitrus in his research, conducted on comparative analysis of word formation processes between Hausa and English concluded that Hausa language does have instances of circumfixes. (2015)

However, Umar (2017) conducted a similar study on the nature of affixation in Hausa language and found out that Hausa has about five different types of affixes which include circumfixation process. Also, his findings indicated that infixation in Hausa does not only occur but is more productive than in English language. Even Rufa’i (1979), in his paper justified the occurrence of circumfixation process in Hausa with detailed illustrations.

In view of the above, this research is therefore aimed at finding out the actual status of these processes in the two languages. Thus, the researcher intends to gather his data via a primary source which will provide firsthand information on the phenomena.

Methodology

Descriptive linguistic approach was the method adopted in this research. It is an empirical method used to explicitly study both the diachronic and synchronic nature of language (Lehman 1972). The aim of this study is to juxtapose the process of infixation and circumfixation in the two languages to be able to prove their existence or otherwise and their forms in both languages. Through this linguistic inquiry, any available linguistic form or datum should be analyzed diachronically or synchronically and at the same time, to examine the behavior of its linguistic variables and noticeable features in terms of infixation and circumfixation. The analysis is based on some insights from descriptive deliberations of linguists like Matthew (1974), Rufa’i (1979), Smirnova (1982)Newman (2000), Abubakar (2001), Umar (2008), Haspelmath & Sims (2010), Al-Hassan (2011a & b), Aronoff & Fudeman (2011) among others; plus the researcher’s scholarship in current researches on Hausa studies in order to achieve its main objectives pertaining to infixation and circumfixation.

Theoretical Framework

The theoretical framework adopted in this work is Contrastive Analysis Theory. It is an area of comparative linguistics which is concerned with the comparison of two or more languages to determine the differences or similarities between them, either for theoretical purposes or purposes external to the analysis itself. It implies a belief in language universals, if there were no features in common, there would be no basis for comparison. Broadly defined, CA has been used as a tool in comparative historical linguistics to establish language genealogy, in typological linguistics to create language taxonomies, in translation theory to investigate problems of equivalence to create bilingual dictionaries.

Contrastive analysis theory was first formulated by Fries in 1940s and brought into academic discourse by Robert Lado when he wrote his famous monograph Linguistics across Cultures (1957). In this book, he claimed that “those elements that are similar to his native language will be simple for him and those elements that are different will be difficult.” This conviction that linguistic differences could be used to predict learning difficulty produced the notion of contrastive analysis hypothesis: “where two languages were similar, positive transfer would occur, where they were different, negative transfer or interference would result” (Lado, 1957).

Lado (1957) also emphasizes the importance of comparison between the second language and the native language in terms of teaching. He holds that “the teacher who has made a contrast of the foreign language with the native language of the students will know better what the real problems are and provide solutions in teaching them.” Contrastive analysis theory also has a certain guiding significance to today’s English teaching in our schools. It can help foreign language teachers to understand and predict what kinds of errors students may make in their English learning so as to nip them in the bud. According to Lado quoted in Gast (2014) “Contrastive analysis is a scientific description of language to be learned carefully compared with a parallel descriptive of the native language of the learner”. The observation of Lado (1957) aptly highlighted the linguistic variants and discrepancies as well as similarities that are inherent in human languages across the globe.

According to the behaviorist theories prevailing at the time, language learning was a question of habit formation and this could be reinforced or impeded by existing habits. Therefore, the difficulty in mastering certain structures in a second language (L2) depends on the differences between the learners’ (L1) and the language they are trying to learn (TL). The views of scholars at the time are what Lado claims that those elements which are similar to (the learner’s) native language will be simple for him, and those that are different will be difficult.

In view of the above explications and justifications, it is obvious that for proper learning to take place, the second language teacher must be conversant with the rules guiding the structures in the first language which are similar to the second language and those that are different so as to detect where to encounter problems. If this is not properly outlined, the learner is liable to commit errors in the target language, because, he/she will transfer those habits from the L1 to the target language (TL).

Corder states: “a learner of a foreign (second) language has already had well developed articulatory movement and perpetual strategies before his exposure to a new language. As such, he hears and produces words in the target language in terms of his native phonological categories”. This means that for an English learner who has acquired Hausa language as L1 to learn English, his major impediments can be morphological processes, hence Contrastive Analysis theory for this work. (1981)

Data Analysis of Infixation Process in English and Hausa

Infixation in English

Infixes are affixes attached to the heart of the root word or morpheme (Ukam 2020). Most authorities believe that infix, like interfix and circumfix, does not exist in English. Udofot (1999), for example, argued that infixes are very rare in English but very common in Semitic languages (Hebrew, for example). She cited Sloat and Taylor (1978), maintaining that the only infix found in English is the introduction of ‘-n- or –m-‘inserted in roots borrowed from Latin. She went further to state that some infixes such as ‘bloody’ is fused inside words like ‘possible’ so that the resultant word would be ‘im-bloody-possible. Her conclusion is that even though such words like ‘im-bloody-possible’, ‘kan-fucking-roo’ and ‘uni-goddam-versity’ are all infixes which are inserted inside the heart of ‘impossible’, ‘kangaroo’, and ‘university’, respectively, such English words are derogatory and are not used in a formal environment (Udofot, 1999).

Also, Crystal observes that infixes are not commonly found in European languages, English inclusive, but it is commonly found in Asian, American, Indian and African languages, Hausa inclusive (2008). For Ndimele (1999), “English does not have any clear-cut case of an infix, without considering that words like ‘feet’, ‘teeth’, ‘men’, ‘cut’, ‘gave’, and ‘got’, among others, are instances where infixes could be found in English. Rather, he maintained that those irregular “changes we observe in the above examples are not infixes” in English.

In view of the above, we can conclude that English language has rare cases of infixation process which are not mostly found in formal conversation.

Infixation in Hausa

Infixation process in Hausa appears more productive than in English language. This can be justified from the data below:

Datum 1

base	meaning	derived word	meaning	Infix
bardee	gladiator	Baraadee	gladiators	aa (vv)
kyauree/kyamre	Door	kyamaaree/kyawaaree	doors	aa (vv)
gurgu	Cripple	Guraaguu	cripples	aa (vv)
Gurbi	Slot	Guraabuu	slots	aa (vv)

The above data shows how Hausa language uses infixation process to show plurality of nouns by using ‘aa’ as infix.

Datum 2

Base	meaning	derived word	meaning	Infix
Makirii	Conspirator	Makirci	conspiracy	C
Kafirii	Pagan	Kafirci	paganism	C
Jahilii	ignorant	Jahilci	ignorance	C
Adalii	fair/just person	Adalci	justice	C
Kanee	younger brother	Kannee	younger brothers	C

In the above data, it can be seen that hausa uses infix ‘c’ to convert names of persons or things to the names of a process. This can be seen as a clear instance of inflectional morphology.

Datum 3

Base	Meaning	derived word	meaning	Infix
Wannan	This	Wadannan	these	da (cv)
Wancan	That	Wadancan	those	da (cv)
Wannee	which one	Wadannee	which ones	da (cv)

In this data, we can see how infix ‘da’ is used by Hausa to differentiate between demonstrative pronouns in terms of proximity.

Datum 4

Base	Meaning	Derived word	Meaning	Infix
Muuguu	Villain	Miyaaguu	Villains	yaa (cvv)
kamee/kamaa	Arrest	Kamammee	arrested one	mam (cvc)
dafee/dafaa	Cook	Dafaffee	cooked one	faf (cvc)
Macee	Die	Mataccee	dead one	tac (cvc)

The data above shows how closed and open syllables are used as infixes to either show plurality or a derivational morphology. The ‘mam’ in kamammee, ‘faf’ in dafaffee, and ‘tac’ in mataccee are all used to change the class of the base words (from verb to adjective), while the infix ‘yaa’ in miyaaguu is used to show the plural form of the base word (muuguu).

Circumfixation in English and Hausa

Circumfixation in English

This is a morphological process in which attachment is made both before and after the root of a word. English exhibits this linguistic feature while forming some words. For instance, in English words like: understatement –under (prefix) + state (root) + ment (suffix); transformation –trans (prefix) + form (root) + ation (suffix); disappointment – dis (prefix) + appoint (root) + ment (suffix) are formed via circumfixation process. Other examples include: Un-friendly, ascattered, dis-likeness, illegally, transplantation, mono-lingualism, bilingualism, multilingualism, disestablishment, uncountable, enlargement etc.

Circumfixation in Hausa

Hausa also exhibits this process copiously. This process is referred to as “dafa go-qeya” (circumfixation). Some of the instances of circumfixation in Hausa can be seen in the table below:

Prefix	Base/stem	Suffix	Derived word	Word class
Ba+	zamfara	ee	bazamfaree (Zamfara indigene)	n – adj
Ba	Hausa	ee	bahaushee (Hausa man)	n – adj
Ba	Kano	waa	bakanuwaa (Kano woman)	n – adj
Ba	haguu (left)	oo	bahagoo (lefthanded)	n – adj
Ba	goobir (city)	ii	bagoobirii (man of Gobir)	n –adj
Ma	guugaa (brush up)	ii	magoogii (tooth brush)	v – n
Ma	karatuu (reading)	aa	makarantaa (school)	n – n
Ma	tabbas (certain)	aa	matabbataa (permanent abode)	adj – n
Ma	shaa (drink)	yaa	mashaayaa (beer parlour)	v – n

The table above shows how Hausa language uses the process of circumfixation in forming new words. Some of the words formed are often derivational (class-changing) in nature, while others are merely inflectional (class-maintaining) in nature.

From the data presented above, it can be observed that unlike English language, Hausa language has numerous instances of infixation. It is used to show both plurality, inflectional morphology, derivational morphology and demonstrative pronoun. On the contrary, English language uses few instances of infixation commonly found in the informal usage of the language.

Moreover, circumfixation process is common in Hausa just as it is common in English language. It is used to indicate inflectional and derivational processes as shown in the table above.

Major Findings

After careful review and analysis of the collated data, the following findings were made:

It was discovered that Hausa language has numerous instances of infixation. It is used to indicate plurality, inflectional morphology, derivational morphology and demonstrative pronouns. On the contrary, English language uses few instances of the same process which commonly found in the informal usage of the language.

It was also discovered that circumfixation process is common in Hausa language just like it is common in English language. It is used to indicate inflectional and derivational morphology as justified in the data above.

Conclusion

In view of the above, we can conclude that Hausa language does not only have few instances of infixation process but also has different categories of the process which include: inflectional and derivational infixes in addition to vocalic, consonantal and syllabic infixes as identified by Umar (2017). In contrast, English language does not have a clear instance of this process. The only few identifiable instances can be seen in informal usage of the language.

Similarly, contrary to what some researchers claimed that Hausa does not exhibit circumfixation process, this research has shown that Hausa demonstrates this process just like English language. In fact, the process can be classified into class-maintaining and class-changing circumfix (inflectional and derivational).

This study has clearly explicated the fact that Hausa and English languages share some commonalities as far as infixation process is concerned. It has also shown that there are few areas of differences between the two languages in terms of circumfixation. It could therefore be imperative to conduct more researches in other morphological processes between the two languages to ascertain their areas of convergence and divergence. This would go a long way in justifying reasons behind some difficulties Hausa L2 learner often encounter in their course of learning English so as to find solutions to such problems by English teachers.

Moreover, this paper will be of great significance, particularly to Hausa L2 learners as well as the teachers of English language in Hausa communities. It guides their understanding of lexeme formation processes, particularly the compounding process which will help in assessing the factors that are responsible for students’ error in the use of English compounds. It equally serves as a reference point for English book writers and curriculum designers in schools of Hausa communities.

References

1.      Abubakar, A. (2001). An Introductory Hausa Morphology. Maiduguri: Faculty of Arts, University of Maiduguri.

2.      Al-Hassan, B. (2006) “Does Hausa Really Have Infixation?” Unpublished Seminar Paper Presented at the Department of Nigerian and African Languages, Ahmadu Bello University Zaria, Kaduna State

3.      Al-Hassan, B. S. Y (2011a). “Does Hausa Really Have Infixation?” Studies of the Department of African Languages and Cultures. No 45: pp 7-21.

4.      Al-Hassan, B. S. Y. (2011b). “Transfixation in Hausa: A Hypothetical Analysis”. Studies of the Department of African Languages and Cultures. No 45: pp 39-58.

5.      Aronoff, M. & Fudeman K. (2011). What is morphology (2nd ed.) UK; Blackwell Publishing.

6.      Corder, S. P. (1981) Error Analysis and Interlanguage. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

7.      Crystal, D. (2008). A Dictionary of Linguistics and Phonetics. 6th edition. The UK: Blackwell.

8.      Edadi, I. U. (2020). Do Infixes Exist in English? A Morphological Analysis. Journal of the English Teachers Association of Nigeria. Vol. 10, pp. 85-98.

9.      National Open University of Nigeria (2009) Course Material for English language in Nigeria. Department of English.

10.  Elson B. & Picket V. (1976). An Introduction to Morphology and Syntax. California: Summer Institute of Linguistics.

11.  National Open University of Nigeria (2020) Course Material for English language in Nigeria. Department of English: National Open University of Nigeria.

12.  Haspelmath, M. (2002). Understanding morphology. London.Hodder Education.

13.  Haspelmath, M. and A. A. Sims, (2010). Understanding Morphology. 2nd edition. London: Hodder Education.

14.  Inuwa, Y. N. (2017) Circumfixation as a Morphological Process in Hausa. In Yusuf, M. A., Salim, B. A. & Bello, A. (eds.). Endangered languages in Nigeria: Structure, Policy and Documentation. A Festschrift in Honour of Professor M.K.M Galandanchi. Kano: Bayero University, Press. Vol. II, pp. 651 – 660.

15.  Lado, R. (1957) Linguistics Across Cultures. Applied Linguistics, for Language Teachers. University of Michigan Press; Ann Arbor.

16.  Lehman, W. P. (1972): Descriptive Linguistics: An Introduction. The USA: Blackwell.

17.  Lyon, J. (1977). Semantics. Cambridge University Press.

18.  Matthews, P. H. (1974). Morphology: An introduction to word-structure of language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

19.  Newman, P. (1996) Hausa and the Chadic language Family: A Bibliography (African Linguistic Bibliographies, 6). Rudiger Koppe Verlag, Cologne.

20.  Newman, R.M. (1990). An English-Hausa Dictionary. Yale University Press, New Haven.

21.  Ndimele, N. (1999). Morphology and Syntax. Port Harcourt: M & J Grand Orbit Communication.

22.  Rufa’i, A. (1979). Principle Resources of Lexeme-formation in Hausa. Harsunan Nijeriya 9: 1-18.

23.  Sani, D. (2002) Word-formation in Hausa: A case study of derivation, Functional shift and clipping. Ph.D Dissertation, Bayero University, Kano.

24.  Udofot, I. M. (1999). An Introduction to the morphology of English. Ikot Ekpene. Development Universal Consortia.

25.  Umar, A. U. (2020). Bitar Ɗafi a Tasrifin Hausa. A Paper Presented at the Two-day International Conference on Hausa within Chadic Studies in the 21st Century in Honour of Professor Nina Pawlak, Organized on 7th – 9th January, 2020 by Center for Research in Nigerian Languages, Translation and Folklore (CRNLT&F), Bayero University, Kano.

26.  Zubairu B. S. (2015). Comparative Study of Morphological Processes in English and Hausa Languages. An Unpublished M.A Thesis submitted to the Department of English and Literary Studies, University of Nigeria NSUKKA.