Ye Merrye Conlangre: Questionnaire on Imperatives
This is A Typological Questionnaire on Imperative Constructions by
Viktor S. Xrakovskij (Russian Academy of Sciences, Institute of Linguistic Research,
St. Petersburg), in Typology of Imperative Constructions, ed.
V.S. Xrakovskij, Lincom Studies in Theoretical Linguistics, 09 (2001).
This questionnaire contains a tentative list of questions to be answered by any
typologically oriented study of imperative sentences in a specific language based
on the model proposed in Chapter 1.
Morphology
- What verb forms are traditionally included in the imperative paradigm of your
language? Do you agree with this traditional classification? If not, what
forms, in your opinion, should be excluded from the traditional imperative
paradigm, and how should they be classified instead? What forms should be
added to the paradigm?
- What grammatical categories in your language are specific for the imperative
only (e.g. in Mongolian, Nivkh, Lezgi, and Japanese, the category of person is
distinguished only in the imperative but not in the indicative)?
- What grammatical categories of your language acquire specific forms or
meaning when used in the imperative (e.g. in Russian, imperative person and
number markers differ from those in the indicative, cf. Russian id'osh
`[you] go' vs. idi `go!'; Russian verb forms of the type id'om
have different interpretations depending on whether they are used in the
imperative or in the indicative: in the first case, they denote joint action by
the speaker and a single listener (dualis), i.e. `let's go', while in the
second, the agent of the prescribed action can include the speaker, a single
or plural listener(s) and/or outside person(s) that do not participate in the
speech act (pluralis))?
- Do any verb markers of your language vary in meaning depending on whether they
are used in imperative or non-imperative sentences (e.g. in Tagalog,
the marker that is labeled "sociative" in non-imperative sentences, changes its
meaning to that of a marker of politeness when used in imperative sentences)?
- What analytic imperative verb forms are attested in your language, if any? What
auxiliary verbs (causative verbs, modal verbs, verbs of motion or giving) or
particles derived from them are used in analytic imperatives?
- What imperative forms in your language, if any, are homonymous with other,
non-imperative forms (e.g., indicative future or present, verb forms of other
moods, etc.)?
- What person/number meanings, if any, are expressed in the imperative paradigm
of your language?
- Normally, imperative person/number paradigms differ from those attested in the
indicative and other moods by their composition. For example, the Russian
imperative paradigm, in contrast to the indicative, has specific dual forms
(1st+2nd SG and 1st+2nd PL),
cf. Russian: Jedem! or Jedemte! `Let's go (I and you SG/PL)'.
Does your language have the same situation, or are there any other person/number
forms that are found in the imperative but not in the indicative paradigm,
or vice versa?
- Do corresponding imperative, indicative (or other mood) person/number markers in
your language coincide, or differ from each other?
- Is there any variability of imperative verb forms in your language (cf. Russian:
Budem chitat'! / Davaj chitat'! / Davaj budem chitat'! `Let us read'),
and what are the rules for the distribution of the different variants?
- The indicative mood in various languages distinguishes aspect, tense, voice,
gender, class, and other categories, whose forms are often used in the imperative
as well (cf. Russian: poj! `sing! (imperfective)' vs. spoj `sing!
(perfective)'; Latin: vince! `win! (active voice)' vs. vincere!
`Let you be vanquished! (passive voice)', etc). Can all indicative categories
and forms, attested in your language, be used in the imperative? Which of them
cannot be used in the imperative, if any? What is the explanation for the absence
of some of the indicative categories/forms from the imperative paradigm?
- Do imperative verb forms in your language differ in any way (by composition
stress) from those of other categories? Are there any grammatical limitations
on imperative verb formation?
- What is the comparative frequence of various imperative verb forms? And of
imperative and non-imperative verb forms used in imperative sentences?
- Does your language have any other mood forms (as, for example Eskimo
optatives), whose basic or sole function is that of conveying imperative meanings?
How do these correlate with imperative verb forms or, in other words, what are
the rules for their distribution and occurrence?
- What verb forms and negation markers are used in the prohibitive sentences of
your langauge?
- What (and how many) verb forms are distinguished in the prohibitive paradigm
of your language? Do the imperative and prohibitive paradigms of your language
differ in their composition? What verb forms, if any, are missing (or, on the
contrary, additionally appear) in the prohibitive paradigm?
- What are the specific preventive verb forms used in your language, if any
(cf. Russian: Ne poskol'znis'! `Beware not to slip!' or Aleut:
sisa-aGana-Xt! `Beware not to lose your way!')? Do they have
specialized markers (as in Aleut), or do they use other verb category markers
(e.g. perfective markers in Russian)?
- What are the specific formal features of address in your language? Is there a
special vocative case used in address formulas? Are there any other special
address markers? Are there any similarities in morphophonological structure
between imperative and address forms in your language?
Syntax
- What is the syntactic structure of imperative sentences in your language?
What are their compulsory and optional elements? Is there any word order, or
prosody patters specific for imperative sentences? Do various imperative verb
forms differ in syntactic valence from each other and from indicative or other
mood forms?
- Does your language have special adverbal particles (as the Russian particle
-- ka, cf. Russian: Zamolchi-ka! `Come on, shut up!') or other
words that are used only in imperative sentences or acquire a special meaning
when used in imperative sentences (as the Russian particle zhe, cf.
Russian: Zamolchi zhe `Shut up, will you')? What are the functions of
these particles? Do they in any way influence the actant/circonstant structure
of the sentence, its word order, or prosodic pattern?
- In principle, the use of pronominal subjects in imperative sentences can be
compulsory, optional, or prohibited. Which of these situations is characteristic
for your language? If your language optionally uses imperative sentences with
and without 2nd person pronominal subjects (cf. Russian:
Podozhdi ty! `[You] wait!' vs.
Mozhno ja teb'a podozhdu? -- Podozhdi! "May I wait for you?" "Wait (=Do)!",
what is their selection based on?
- If an imperative sentence comprises an agent, it can be either the subject
(cf. Russian: Ty sxodi k masteru! `You go see a specialist!') or an
address (cf. Russian: Ej ty, sxodi k masteru `Hey, you, go see a
specialist!'). If both of the above uses are found in your language, how are
they distinguished?
- Are there verbless imperative sentences in your language (e.g. Water!;
or John, to the Director! Now!)? Can one describe these sentences (or
some of them) as elliptic utterances with an omitted imperative verb form?
- Does your language have multi-predicative imperative sentences structured as
imperative verb sequences (e.g. Eat and drink!)? If not, what
constructions can be described as their functional synonyms?
Semantics and Pragmatics
- Grammars of many languages note that imperative verbs can convey various
meanings (e.g. command, demand, request, advice, permission, etc). Are these
interpretations applicable to imperative verbs in your language? What criteria
are used to distinguish between different interpretations? Do various
imperative and non-imperative verb forms found in imperative sentences have the
same array of interpretations?
- Are there "emphatic" imperatives in your language?
- Does your language rank imperative verb forms by their degree of politeness?
- Are there imperative verb forms relfecting socially marked oppositions?
- Are there any lexical or semantic restrictions on the use of imperative,
prohibitive, or preventive verb forms in your language? Are these restrictions
the same for imperative, prohibitive, and preventive verbs?
- Does your language have non-imperative verb forms (as, for instance, the
Russian infinitive) that can be used in imperative sentences (cf. Russian:
Svistat' vsex naverx! `Pipe [=to pipe] all hands on deck!')? What
imperative verb forms can they replace? What are their specific semantic
features? Could you identify any specific factors behind the speaker's choice
between imperative or non-imperative verb forms?
- What speech situations are the most typical for the use of verbless imperative
sentences?
- What types of sentences in your language can be imperative by their semantics,
though not by form?
- Do imperative sentences in your language have any specific features related to
their functional perspective?
- If the imperative verb forms of your language can be used in non-imperative
sentence, what "secondary" meanings do they convey? Can all imperative verb
forms, or only some of them, convey these meanings? What is the correlation
between such "secondary" and "primary" imperative meanings?
Main Conlang Page
Apollo Hogan, Berkeley, California, USA