A Comparative Analysis of Clitics and Affixes in the Kanuri Ajami

Citation: Ali, M. N. (2026). “A Comparative Analysis of Clitics and Affixes in the Kanuri Ajami” In Ɗunɗaye Journal of Hausa Studies, Vol. 04, No. 01, Pp. 1 – 9. www.doi.org/10.36349/djhs.2026.v04n01.001

A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF CLITICS AND AFFIXES IN THE KANURI AJAMI

By

Muhammad Nur Ali

Department of Linguistics, Faculty of Arts,
National Institute for Nigerian Languages Abia State

Abstract:

Comparative scholarly research on clitics and affixes in Kanuri has gained some attention, particularly in relation to the Latin-based or Roman writing system. However, there has been little to no research conducted on the Arabic-based or Ajami writing system to compare and contrast the two. This paper presents a contrastive study of affixes and clitics using Kanuri Ajami data. Kanuri Ajami is an adaptation of Arabic graphemes designed to write Kanuri or any other language. Muslim scholars within the Kanuri community have utilized Kanuri Ajami to communicate and document their writings. They use this script to draft wills and document their history, norms, and culture. Notable scholars in this tradition include Sheikh Baya, Sheikh Gonimi, and Sheikh Kolo. This paper specifically examines the writings of Sheikh Goni Modu Goni Kolo, employing a text analysis method to identify both clitics and affixes within his work. The study follows the model proposed by Zwicky and Pullum (1983) and applies their six criteria to distinguish between affixes and clitics. Of these six criteria, the study successfully demonstrates four in the context of Kanuri Ajami data. Using these criteria, the research identifies a total of fourteen bound morphemes along with their Ajami representations, classifies five as affixes: (-ne: نٜى) (-ma: مَ) (-wa:وَ ) (-ya: يَهْ:), and (–ga:غ) . In contrast, the eight morphemes are classified as clitics: (-be: بٜه), (-ro:رُ ) (–tә: تْ ) (–n:نْ ) (–so: سُو ) (nәm: نْمْ ) (–nzә: نزْ ) and (–nde: دٜىٰ )

Keywords: Clitics, Affixes, Ajami writing, Latin-based and Roman writing system. 

1. Introduction

The morphological typology of the Kanuri language clearly demonstrates that Kanuri is an agglutinative language. "Agglutinative" refers to a language that combines multiple morphemes to create a single word (Bulakarima and Shettima, 2012). According to Hutchison (1981), Cyffer (1991, 1997), and Bulakarima (1983), Kanuri forms derivatives or nominals by combining several morphemes, each of which conveys a specific meaning. For instance, when examining the finite verb in Kanuri, it is evident that all inflectional morphemes such as those indicating person and tense as well as optional derivational morphemes like causative and passive-reflexive forms, are attached to the root or base word to create a single meaningful unit.

Moreover, the agglutinative nature of Kanuri is also found in Ajami writing system which highlighted through the processes of affixation and cliticization. These two processes are similar in that they both involve attaching elements to the root. Consequently, this paper aims to examine the differences between affixes and clitics using Kanuri Ajami text. It adopts the framework proposed by Zwicky and Pullum (1983) to identify, classify, and compare affixes and clitics in the Kanuri Ajami text of Sheikh Goni Modu Goni Kolo.

1.1. About the Book

This book is an unpublished manuscript written in Kanuri Ajami by Sheikh Goni Modu Goni Kolo in the year 1420 AH (1998). The manuscript is presented in the Maghribi style and consists of fifteen pages, including the cover. It contains poems made up of one hundred and thirty-five stanzas. The book is divided into three main topics: Nasaaihuddin, Kanzunnada fi Madhi Nabiyyil Hudaa, and Daawaatu Bikhairi Addaraini Ma’a attusil Bikhairil Bariyati.

2.0 Definition of Affixes and Clitics

It is essential to review existing literature on the definitions of affixes and clitics to understand their distinctions. This review will enable readers to recognize the differences between affixes and clitics as defined by various scholars, helping them gain a clearer understanding of the topic.

Zwicky and Pullum (1983) specifically describe clitics as words that are phonologically dependent on adjacent words. Katamba (1993) defines a clitic as an unstressed particle that attaches to a host, meaning the main word, and emphasizes that clitics cannot stand alone. He further explains that clitics are a class of bound morphemes that can be appended to independent words through syntactically motivated rules; the words to which clitics are attached is referred to as hosts or anchors.

Halpern (1995) asserts that clitics are prosodically weak (i.e., unaccented) elements that do not function as canonical inflectional or derivational affixes. Frotscher et al. (2002) describe clitics as typically unstressed words that form a single prosodic unit with an adjacent word. Crystal (2008) provides a comprehensive definition, referring to a clitic as a form that resembles a word but cannot stand alone in normal speech, as it is phonologically dependent on a host. Aronoff and Fudeman (2011) trace the origin of the word "clitic" to the classical Greek term ‘Klinein,’ meaning ‘to lean,’ highlighting that clitics are grammatical words unable to stand on their own phonologically; instead, they must 'lean' on an adjacent word to be incorporated into its prosodic structure. Spencer and Luis (2012) offer a concise, modern definition, stating that a clitic is a form of a word that is phonologically attached to another word, its host. Most recently, Cyffer and Bulakarima (2023), in their study of Kanuri grammar, define clitics as a category of morphemes that are semantically independent but must be linked with another word or phrase.

From the literature above, it is evident that clitics are defined from various perspectives, and each scholar has provided explanations that may differ or align with one another. Nonetheless, phonological dependency is a characteristic consistently attributed to clitics by nearly all scholars. This indicates that clitics cannot stand alone to convey meaning; rather, they are attached to their host words. Halpern's (1995) definition stands out from those of the other scholars, as he emphasizes the prosodic weakness of clitics and distinguishes them from inflectional or derivational affixes.

2.1 Types of Clitics

Much research has been carried out by different scholars, who have developed various typological views on clitics and their types. However, this paper makes reference to the classification of Zwicky and Pullum (1983), who categorized clitics into three main types: simple, special, and bound clitics.

2.1.1 Simple Clitics

A simple clitic corresponds to a phonologically weak function word such as a preposition, auxiliary verb, or definite marker that must adjoin phonologically to an adjacent accented word (Spencer and Luis, 2012, citing Zwicky, 1977). Zwicky (1977, 5) describes this phenomenon as follows: "a free morpheme, when unaccented, may be phonologically reduced, the resultant form being phonologically subordinate to a neighboring word."

2.1.2 Special Clitcs

Unlike simple clitics, special clitics also termed syntactic clitics by Luis, 2004) are not phonologically reduced forms of independent words. Rather, they are bound morphemes that appear only in specific syntactic contexts. Zwicky (1977, 3) defines them as "an unaccented bound form" that "acts as a variant of a stressed free form with the same cognitive meaning and with a similar phonological makeup."

 

2.1.3 Bound Clitics

Bound clitics are unaccented forms that lack a stressed counterpart. They are semantically associated with a word, phrase, clause, or an entire constituent but phonologically attached to the first word or constituent (Spencer and Luis, 2012).

The above-reviewed literature has explained clitics and their types in detail, and it is significant to review affixes and their types to see at what level or stage the two are related. Katamba (1993) describes an affix as a morpheme that only occurs when attached to some other morpheme or morphemes, such as a root, stem, or base. He later defines affixes as bound morphemes, which means morphemes that cannot stand on their own.

2.2 Types of Affixes

Katamba (1993:44) classifies affixes into three: prefixes, suffixes, and infixes.

(i) Prefixes: an affix attached before a root or stem or base.

(ii) Suffixes: an affix attached after a root (or stem or base).

(iii) Infixes: an affix inserted into the root itself

Affixation is a morphological process where formative elements are attached to existing words. According to Abubakar (2001), this involves prefixes (before the root) and suffixes (after the root), along with infixes placed within the root. He differentiates between derivational affixes, which create new words, and inflectional affixes, which modify existing words.

In the context of Kanuri, Bulakarima and Shettima (2012) classify prefixes into derivational and inflectional types, with inflectional prefixes further divided into tense/aspect and person prefixes. They categorize derivational morphemes into four types: kәr-, n-, nәm-, and kәr-. For suffixation, they noted that Kanuri supports this process with over eleven suffixes, including -ri, -ti, -ma, -ram, -mi, -la, -no, -nza, -wa, -bu, and -be.

3.1 Theoretical Framework

The careful examination of the definitions of affixes and clitics does not clearly reveal the differences between them. Zwicky and Pullum (1983) classified both clitics and affixes as types of bound morphemes, which are typically attached to free words in many languages. Since both are considered bound morphemes, it raises the question: how do we classify certain bound morphemes as either affixes or clitics, and at what level of analysis? To address this, this paper adopts the framework proposed by Zwicky and Pullum (1983), which outlines six criteria for distinguishing clitics from affixes. These criteria will serve as evidence to clearly separate instances of each type.

1. Clitics can exhibit a low degree of selection with respect to their hosts, while affixes exhibit a high degree of selection with respect to their stems.

2. Arbitrary gaps in the set of combinations are more characteristic of affixed words than of clitics groups.

3. Morphological idiosyncrasies are more characteristic of affixed words than of clitics groups

4. Syntactic rules can affect affixed words, but cannot affect clitics groups.

5. Clitics can attach to material already containing clitics but affixes cannot.

6. Semantic idiosyncrasies are more typical of affixed words than clitics groups.

 

 

4.0 Discussion

Based on the six criteria proposed by Zwicky and Pullum (1983) to distinguish clitics and affixes, this paper examines the Kanuri Ajami writing of Sheikh Goni Modu Goni Kolo and identifies fourteen bound morphemes. It classifies these bound morphemes into affixes and clitics, of which five are affixes while eight are clitics. All are presented in Table 1 below; in the left column are affixes, while in the right columns are clitics, alongside their examples in Latin and Ajami. The lexical items that carry the affixes and the clitics are also identified based on the word class (i.e., noun, verbal noun, pronoun, verb, particle, and interjection).

Table: 1 Affixes and Clitics

S/N	Affixes	Clitics	Examples
			Latin	Ajami	Word class
1.	-ne/ ــنٜىٰ		abadne cidane cine kәrane	عَبَدْنٜىٰ ثِدَنٜىٰ ثِنٜىٰ كْرَنٜىٰ	Verb (gin) Verb (gin) Verb (gin) Verb (gin)
2.	-ma/ــمَ		Gәratәma kunjomaro	غْرَتْمَ كُنْجُومَرُ	Verbal Noun Noun
3.	-wa/ ــوا		Kingayamwabe maskinwaro muminwabe	كِنْغَايَمْبٜه مَسْكِنْوَارُ مُمِنْوَابٜه	Noun Noun Noun
4.	-yah/ــيَهْ		samnәmiyah raamiyah raknәmiya nonәmiyah	سَمْنْمِيَهْ رَءَامِيَهْ رَكْنْمِيىَ نُنْمِييَهْ	Verb (gin) Verb (kin) Verb (gin) Verb (gin)
5.		-ga/ــغَ	Adinga Furtәga ilmuga koltәga koltәnzәga	اَدِنْغَ فْرْتْغَ عِلْمُغَ كُلْتْغَ كُلْتْنْذْغَ	Noun Noun Adjective Verb Verb
6.		-be/ــبٜهْ	Allamtәbe hersobe kamsobe kundobe kәmaanibe lәmannәmbe	عَلَّمْتْبٜهْ خٜرْسُوبٜهْ كَمْسُبٜهْ كُنْدُوبٜهْ كْمَانِيبٜهْ لْمَنّْمْبٜهْ	Verb Verbal noun Noun Verb Noun Noun
7.		-tә/ــتْ	Allamtәtә nonәmitә	عَلَّمْتْتْ نُنْمِتْ	Verb Noun
8.		-ro/ـــرُ	Bigәro dibalro kunjomaro Titәro	بِيغْرُ دِيبَلْرُ كُنْجُومَرُ تِيتْرُ	Noun Noun Noun Verbal Noun
9.		-so/ــسُو	hersobe kamsobe Sambisoro	خٜرْسُوبٜهْ كَمْسُبٜهْ سَمْبِيسُرُ	Noun Noun Interjection
10.		-nәm/ــنْمْ	Ilmunәmnin kәmanәm saalanәmga	عِلْمُنْمْنِںْ كْمَانْمْبٜهْ سَالَنْمْغَ	Noun Noun Noun
11.		-nzә/ــنْذْ	jaazanzә	جَازَنْذْ	Noun
12.		-n/ـــںْ -nin/ــنِںْ	Kalangin ilmunәmnin kundon kәratәn Allamtәn	كَلَنْغِںْ عِلْمُنْمْنِںْ كُنْدُںْ كْرَتْںْ عَلَّمْتْنْ	Noun Noun Verb Verb Verb
13.		-nde/ ـــدٜىٰ	shafatәmande muskonde wasilande lardәnde ande tadawande	شَفَتْمَندٜىٰ مُسْكُنْدٜىٰ وَسِيلَنْدٜىٰ لَرْضْنْدٜىٰ أَنْدٜىٰ تَدَوَنْدٜىٰ	Noun Noun Noun Noun Pronoun Noun

 

4.1 Affixes

This paper identified the following affixes in the Kanuri Ajami writing of Kolo: -ne, -ma, -wa,-ya, and –ga. They are all suffixes (i.e., suffixed or attached to the end of the base or stem). However, that does not nullify the case of prefixes or infixes in Kanuri Ajami data. Those presented here are the ones disclosed to this research, especially in the manuscripts that we used (i.e. Kolo’s writing).

4.1.1 Affix -ne/ ــنٜىٰ

It is an affix-bound person morpheme that shows singularity; it is an imperative second-person singular suffix to its base, root, or stem, which mostly selects verbs and gives commands. The complex verb that carries –ne at the end or suffixes –ne has an implied subject: the second-person singular nyi ‘you’. The first criterion of Zwicky and Pullum (1983) describes –ne as an affix because it selects only verbs. There are five instances of –ne in this data, and all select verbs: abadne, ‘you worship’; cidane, ‘you work’; cine, ‘you stand up’; kәrane, ‘you read’.

The second criterion also proved that the bound morpheme –ne (i.e., second-person singular) and its other categories –no (i.e., second-person plural), -zә (i.e., third-person singular), and –za (i.e., third-person plural), particularly in an imperative sentence, have arbitrary gaps. Occasionally, this can be explained in terms of meaning or phonology: some of their forms would either be meaningless or unpronounceable if they were attached to the kin verb. The arbitrary gaps are marked clearly when we look at the Kanuri verb class one (kin) and class two (gin) specifically for this data. The suffix –ne and other categories retain their form when they are suffixed to verb class one (kin).

However, when they are suffixed to verb class two (gin), the forms would either be meaningless or unpronounceable. For example, as in the above data, abadne, cidane, cine, and kәrane are derived from the verb class two (gin) form. Their gin forms are: abadgin, cidagin, cigin, and kәragin.

Furthermore, if we suffix –ne and other categories (-no, -zә, -za) to verb class one (kin), the forms are meaningless or unpronounceable. For example: bukin ‘I am eating’, bune ‘you (sg) eat’, buno ‘you (pl) eat’, buzә ‘he/she should eat’, and buza ‘they should eat’. On the other hand, –ne and other categories (-no, -zә, -za) smoothly go with their stems without affecting the meaning or the pronunciation. From the data: cidane ‘you (sg) work’, cidano ‘you (pl) work’, cidazә ‘he/she works’, and cidaza ‘they work’.

4.1.2 Affix –ma/ ـــمَ

The first criterion of Zwicky and Pullum (1983) described –ma as an affix; it selects only nouns. The morpheme –ma is an affix (suffix) used to form command nouns by suffixing to a noun. Semantically, it has three senses: it can be used to show ownership, emphasis, and occupation. It is used to show emphasis when it is suffixed to the name of a person. It is used to show ownership when it is suffixed to the name of animals or places, e.g., tadama “the owner of the boy,” ngәlaroma “the owner of the ram,” kuloma “the owner of the farmland,” fatoma “the owner of the house.” It is used to show an occupation when it is suffixed to the names of occupations, e.g., kagalma “smith,” barema “a farmer,” and kәliduma “leather-maker.” It is used to show emphasis, e.g., gomnama isәna “even the governor has come,” Shehuma rukәna “I have seen even the Shehu.” It is used to refer to an entire class of items or people; in most instances, the following phrase or clause has a negative sense, e.g., Moduma, Alima, rukunyi, “I didn’t see neither Modu nor Ali.” However, in this data, –ma is only used to show attributes, e.g., kәnjoma “the giver,” gawurama “forgiver,” and gәratәma “annoyer.”

4.1.3 Affix–wa/ـــوَا

The morpheme –wa is an affix used as a suffix to a Kanuri noun to form its plural form. This paper distinguishes –wa from clitics, since it exhibits a high degree of selection with respect to its stems. It selects only nouns as exemplified in the following examples: kingayam+wa+be, maskin+wa+ro, mumin+wa+be. These examples indicate that the affix –wa is suffixed to each stem to form its plural forms: kingayam “messenger” (sg), kingayamwa with –wa “messengers” (pl); maskin “poor person” (sg), maskinwa with –wa “poor people” (pl); mumin “believer” (sg), muminwa with –wa “believers.”

4.1.4 Affix –ya ــيَهْ (-ga) ــغَ

The bound morpheme –ya is an affix used to give a condition, orthographically written as –ga, which is formally called a conditional marker. However, in Ajami, it is realized as –ya, as exemplified in Table 1 above. Criterion number one confirms that the bound morpheme –ya (ga) is an affix; our examples reveal that it selects only verbs without arbitrary gaps in the set of combinations; it selects both kin and gin verbs, as in samnәmiyah “if you collect,” which is samgin “I collect” (gin verb), and raamiyah “if you like,” which is raakin “I love” (kin verb).

4.1.5 Affix -ga/ــغَ

The bound morpheme –ga is an affix used to suffix a base or stem to mark an object. In the literature, “it is used as a direct object postposition marker; it is marked by suffixing –ga to the direct object of the sentence.” Criterion number one confirms that the bound morpheme –ga is an affix, and our examples reveal that it selects only nouns without arbitrary gaps in the set of combinations. See the examples in Table 1 above. 

4.2 Clitics

The following bound morphemes - -be, -ro, -tә, -n, -so, -nәm, -nzә, and -nde - are clitics identified in the Kanuri Ajami writing of Kolo. All of these morphemes function as suffixes, meaning they are attached to the end of their host words. However, this does not preclude the possibility of prefixes or infixes appearing in Kanuri Ajami data. The morphemes presented here are specifically those revealed through this research, particularly in the manuscript we studied (i.e., Kolo's writings).

4.2.1 Clitics -be/ــبٜهْ

The dependent bound morpheme –be is a clitic used as a suffix to a host to indicate possession. In linguistic literature, it functions as a marker for genitive postpositions. This morpheme is attached to the head noun. As illustrated in the examples provided, it is classified as a clitic because it demonstrates a low degree of selection regarding its hosts. Our data shows that it can attach to nouns, pronouns, interjections, and verbal nouns. For instance, it can be added to nouns such as ilmu+be meaning "of knowledge," and to verbal nouns like herso+be meaning "of good deeds." It also attaches to verbs, as seen in allamtә+be meaning "of learning." Additionally, it can combine with elements that already contain clitics. For example, herso+be ("of good deeds") includes the all-inclusive suffix –so, while kingayamwa+be ("of prophets") includes the plural marker –wa. Other examples include kәmaani+be ("of my lord"), which uses the first person singular dependent possessive pronoun, and kәmande+be ("of our lord"), which uses the first person plural dependent possessive pronoun.

 

4.2.2 Clitics -ro/ـــرُ

The dependent bound morpheme –ro is a clitic that attaches to a host noun to indicate it as an object, functioning as an indirect postposition object marker. It can suffix to nouns, verbal nouns, interjections, and pronouns, as seen in examples like "bigә+ro" for nouns, "ni+ro" for pronouns, and "sambaso+ro" for interjections. Additionally, –ro can join material with existing clitics, such as in "kunjo+ma+ro" (meaning "to a giver"), where it combines with the suffix –ma. It also attaches to the plural marker –wa, as in "maskin+wa+ro," to pronoun "ni" (meaning "you") as in "ni+ro," and to the all-inclusive marker -so as in "samba+so+ro.".

4.2.3 Clitics -tә/ـــتْ

The dependent bound morpheme –tә is a clitic used to suffix to a host as a determiner. In the literature, “is used as a determiner postposition; it is marked by suffixing –dә to the head noun. It is written as –dә in S.K.O., often –tә in Ajami writings. It is clitics because it exhibits a low degree of selection with respect to its hosts; however, here our data shows that it selects nouns, e.g., Ilmutә, ‘the knowledge’ allamtәtә ‘the training’.

4.2.4 Clitics –n/ ـــںْ: (-nin/ ـــنِںْ)

The dependent bound morpheme –n is a clitic used to suffix to a host to mark it as locative. In the literature, “the morpheme –lan it is used as a locative/means postposition, it is marked by suffixing to the head noun, it short form –n can also be used”. However, our data disclosed the only short form –n, as exemplified in the above table one. It is clitic because it exhibits a low degree of selection with respect to its hosts; it selects nouns and verbs. The example of a noun is kannu+n ‘in hellfire,’ and the verb is kundo+n ‘in the action’. The bound morpheme –n also attaches to the material that already containing clitics, e.g., ilmu+nәm+nin ‘in your knowledge’, where the clitic –n is attached with other clitic –nәm.

4.2.5 Clitics -so/ــسُو

The clitic –so is a dependent bound morpheme that denotes inclusivity or collectiveness. Often referred to as an all-inclusive or collective marker, it attaches to various hosts, including nouns, verbal nouns, and interjections. For example, kam+so+be means "of all humans," her+so+be means "of all goodness," and sambi+so+ro means "always." Moreover, –so can also combine with existing clitics, as seen in kamso+be (meaning "of all humans") alongside the genitive marker -be and sambiso+ro (meaning "always") with the indirect object marker.

4.2.6 Clitics -nәm/ــنْمْ

The dependent bound morpheme –nәm is a clitic that is used as a suffix to a host to indicate possession. In literature, it functions as a dependent possessive pronoun, marking the singular second-person possessive pronoun “your,” similar to English. As illustrated in the examples, it behaves as a clitic because it exhibits a low degree of selection with respect to its hosts. Our data shows that it can attach to nouns, such as in the following instances: Ilmu+nәm+nin, meaning “in your knowledge”; kәma+nәm, meaning “your lord”; and sala+nәm+ga, meaning “your prayer.”

4.2.7 Clitics -nzә/ــنْذْ

The dependent bound morpheme –nzә is a clitic that suffixes to a host to indicate possession. In literature, it functions as a dependent possessive pronoun, marking the third person singular possessive pronoun ‘his/her’ or ‘its,’ similar to English. As shown in the examples, this clitic demonstrates a low degree of selection regarding its hosts. Our data reveals that it can attach to nouns, verbs, and particles. For instance, we have examples like jaaza+nzә, meaning ‘it rewards,’ koltә+nzә+ga meaning ‘it has abundance,’ and laa+nzә+ga meaning ‘its others.’ Furthermore, it can connect to material that already contains clitics, s illustrated by koltә+nzә+ga and laa+nzә+ga, where both combinations include the object maker -ga.

4.2.8 Clitics - nde/ ـــدٜىٰ

The dependent bound morpheme –nde is a clitic used to suffix to a host to mark it as possession. It is used as a dependent possessive pronoun. It marks the plural possessive pronoun first person as in English ‘ours’. As exemplified in the above table, one. It is clitic because it exhibit a low degree of selection with respect to its hosts, however, here our data shows that it selects nouns, e.g. kәma+nde+be, ‘our lord’ koro+nde+ro ‘to our question’ moduwa+nde+ga ‘our prayer’ kәma+nde+beh ‘of our lord’ tadawa+nde ‘our children’ and it can also attach to material that already containing clitics, let’s consider the examples again; kәma+nde+be, ‘our lord’ where it is attached with a genitive maker –be, koro+nde+ro ‘to our question’ where it attached with the indirect object marker –ro moduwa+nde+ga ‘our prayer’ where it attached with direct object marker, tadawa+nde ‘our children’ where it attached with plural maker –wa

5.0 Conclusion

This contrastive study examines affixes and clitics using Kanuri Ajami data and is based on Zwicky and Pullum's (1983) framework, which clearly distinguishes between affixes and clitics in Kanuri. The study applies five out of the six criteria proposed by the scholars, thoroughly testing each criterion on every piece of data and justifying the outcomes. Using these criteria, the study identifies fourteen bound morphemes, classifying five of them namely, ne, -ma, -wa, -ya, and –ga as affixes. Specifically, the bound morpheme -ne selects only verb class II, -ma selects only nouns, -wa also selects only nouns, and both -ya and -ga can select from both verb classes one and two. Additionally, the study identifies eight bound morphemes be, -ro, -tә, -n, -so, -nәm, -nzә, and –nde as clitics. These morphemes show a low degree of selection concerning their hosts. The data reveals that -be can attach to nouns, pronouns, interjections, and verbal nouns, while -ro can attach to nouns, verbal nouns, interjections, and pronouns. Notably, both -be and -ro can also attach to material that already contains clitics. Furthermore, the bound morpheme -tә selects only nouns; -n selects both nouns and verbs; and -so can host and select nouns, verbal nouns, and interjections, also attaching to material with existing clitics. Finally, the bound morphemes -nәm and -nde select nouns and can also attach to material that contains clitics.

In summary, this study concludes that the common thread running through these criteria is that affixes are associated with words and, therefore, exhibit the idiosyncrasies characteristic of words. In contrast, clitics are associated with both words and phrases, displaying the regularity and well-behaved nature typically associated with syntax.

References

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

Ali, M.N. (2024) A Study of Kanuri Ajami Orthography of the Popular Scholars. Unpublished

M.A Dissertation, Maiduguri: University of Maiduguri. 

Aronoff, M. and Fudeman, K. (2011) What is Morphology? Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.

Bulakarima, S.U. (1983) The Major Kanuri Dialects: A Phonological Comparison. Unpublished B.A Essay, Maiduguri: University of Maiduguri.

Bulakarima, S.U and Shettima, A.K (2012) An Introductory Kanuri Morphology. Faculty of Arts, University of Maiduguri.

Bulakarima, S.U and Shettima, A.K (2011) Elements of Kanuri Grammar. Maiduguri Desktop Publishing. 

Crystal, D. (2008) A Dictionary of Linguistics and Phonetics. Basil Blackwell, UK.

Cyffer, N. (1991) We Learn Kanuri. Koln Rudilger Koppe Verlage.

Cyffer, N. (1997) The Standard Kanuri Orthography: A step towards language standardization. In: Harsunan Nijeriya VII, PP49-60. 

Cyffer, N. and Bulakarima, U.S (2023) Reference Grammar of Kanuri (Nigeria). Koln: Rudiger Koppe Verlag.

Gazali, B.K.A, and Shu’aibu, Y. (2020) Stylistic Analysis of Cliticization In Peter Abraham’s Mine Boy. In: International Journal Of English and Studies (IJOES). SP Publications Volume-2, PP, 4-18.

Frotscher, et al. (2002) Clitics Morphology, Indogermanisch Morphologie. In: Erweiterter Sicht: Grenzfalle and Ubergange. PP 182-233.

Hutchison, J.P. (1981) ‘The Kanuri Language: A reference grammar’ Madison: University of Wisconsin U.S.A. 

Katamba, F. (1993) ‘Morphology’. London: Longman.

Spencer, A and Ana R Luis (2012) ‘Clitics and Introduction’ permission of Cambridge University Press.

Zwicky, A.M and Pullum, J.K. (1983) ‘cliticization and inflection: English N’T’. In: Language, Vol, 59, No.3.