The Colonial Kaqchikel verb ux and its role in non-verbal predication / Глагол ux в какчикельском языке Колониального периода и его роль в неглагольной предикации

Сычев Роман Владимирович ORCID: 0000-0002-5446-6872 аспирант, кафедра теоретической и прикладной лингвистики, Московский Государственный Университет им. М. В. Ломоносова 119991, Россия, г. Москва, ул. Ленинские Горы, 1-й корпус гуманитарных факультетов, каб. 953 Sychev Roman Vladimirovich Postgraduate student, Department of Theoretical and Applied Linguistics, Lomonosov Moscow State University 119991, Russia, Moscow, Leninskie Gory str., 1st building of the Humanities faculties, room 953 r-sychev@inbox.ru

1. Introduction

In natural languages, two generalized structural types of non-verbal clauses can be identified (i.e., the predicate is a lexeme other than a verb, denoting a property or relation ^[1]): copular and non-copular constructions. The latter can be represented by juxtaposition constructions or constructions with predicative flexion (Type A – personal agreement affix on the predicate or Type B – case marker on the referential noun phrase) ^[2].

In ^[3], 7 semantic types of non-verbal predicates are distinguished: classificational (1), equative (2), attributive (3), appertentive (4), predlocative (5), existential (6), and predpossessive (7). In modern Kaqchikel, non-verbal predicates are represented by non-copular constructions (Type A). Only three types of constructions (5, 6, 7) require the auxiliary element k’o, which, however, is not a true copula since it introduces an essential component of meaning into the construction, possesses its own valency, and always occupies the predicate position – characteristics that a true copula usually does not have (see ^[1],[4]).

(1) in tijonel

1sg.abs teacher

‘I am a teacher.’ ^{[5, p. 14]}

(2) ru-tata’ B’eleje’ Ey

3sg.pos-father B’eleje’ Ey

‘His father is B’eleje’ Ey.’ ^{[5, p. 63]}

(3) pim-ø ru-koton

thick-3sg.abs 3sg.pos-jacket

‘His jacket is thick.’ ^{[5, p. 27]}

(4) la su’t la’ r-ichin nu-xib’al

def sweater dem 3sg.pos-rn 1sg.pos-brother

‘That sweater is my brother’s.’ ^{[5, p. 44]}

(5) akuchi k’o wi ri wayb’äl-jay

where exs part def restaurant

‘Where is the restaurant?’ ^{[5, p. 67]}

(6) jampe ch’atal e k’o pa qa-tijob’al

how.many table 3pl.abs exs pre 1pl.pos-classroom

‘How many tables are there in our classroom?’ ^{[5, p. 20]}

(7) k’o jun ru-koton pim

exs indef 3sg.pos-jacket thick

‘He has a thick jacket.’ ^{[5, p. 27]}

For the Proto-Mayan language, a copula is not reconstructed (e.g., ^[6] and ^[7]). However, in texts in the Kaqchikel language from the Colonial period (XVI-XIX centuries), as well as in descriptions of the language from the same era, the verb ux is encountered, apparently serving as an equative copula in specific contexts (8).

(8) ki-tzih nim a q’ih t-ø-ux

intens-speak big 2sg.pos wealth pot-3sg.abs-cop

‘Truly great must be your wealth.’ ^{[8, p. 74]}

The aim of this study is to describe the morphosyntactic and semantic properties of the verb ux.

The research is based on texts from the colonial period Kaqchikel, including The Annals of the Kaqchikels (a manuscript from the XVI century, published in Philadelphia, USA, in 1885 ^[8]), the Chronicles of B’oko’ (Títulos de B’oko’, XVII-century text ^[9]), grammatical descriptions, and dictionaries of the Kaqchikel language from the XVI to the XIX century (Theologia indorum, known as Manuscript Américain 42 in Bibliothèque Nationale de France ^[10]), works of Franciscan missionaries Betanzos, Parra ^[11], Solano ^[12], Ximénez ^[13], Flores ^[14], Torresano ^[15], Brasseur de Bourbourg ^[16], Brinton ^[17] and ^[8]), as well as texts from grammars and dictionaries from the 16th century attributed to de Villacañas. Works from the 20th century by Schoembs ^[18] and Diaz Barrios, Herbruger ^[19] were used to document grammatical changes.

2. The Kaqchikel Colonial grammars and vocabularies

Kaqchikel, belonging to the K’iche’an (Eastern Mayan) language family alongside K’iche’, Achi, Tzutijil, Sacapultec, and Sipacapense forms the Proper K’iche’an subgroup, exhibiting close linguistic ties. Presently, it boasts around 411,000 native speakers, with diverse dialects such as Southwestern, Eastern, Northern, Santa María de Jesús, Santo Domingo Xenacoj, Central, Southern, Western, and Yepocapa. Geographically, these dialects are distributed across the departments of Chimaltenango, Escuintla, Quiché, Sacatepéquez, Sololá, and the Department of Guatemala in the Republic of Guatemala.

During the Spanish Conquest, the Kaqchikel people, governed by two branches of the same reigning house, witnessed the founding of Guatemala City in their lands. Consequently, the Kaqchikel language gained prominence among missionaries. Francisco Marroquín, appointed as the first bishop of Guatemala in 1534, marked a significant juncture as Catholic doctrinal documents began to be published in Kaqchikel. In 1676, the University of Guatemala was established, and in 1678, it featured a dedicated department for the Kaqchikel language, led by Dominican fray, Father José Senoyo ^{[17, p. 347]}.

All existing grammars and dictionaries of the Kaqchikel language, as well as those of other Mesoamerican languages, were authored by Catholic missionaries, with the majority attributed to Franciscans. The earliest surviving work is the 16th-century Spanish-Kaqchikel dictionary (Vocabulario hispano-cakchiquel chi) by fray Juan Alonso ^{[20, p. 141]}. Another contemporaneous document, Vocabulario cakchiquel, con quiché y zutujil, y castellano attributed to fray Domingo de Vico, is also recognized. Additionally, the title of a work printed in Mexico in 1556, Arte, Vocabulario y Doctrina Christiana en Lengua de Guatemala, is acknowledged. While fray Perdo de Betanzos and fray Juan de Torres are identified as two potential authors, the exact authorship remains uncertain. This work serves as an exposition of the foundations of the Catholic faith in the Kaqchikel language. The Introduction outlines a dispute between Franciscans and Dominicans regarding the use of the Kaqchikel word cabovil (‘god’) to denote the Christian God. Despite advocating for the use of the Spanish word Dios, the work encompasses not only catechism and reasoning but also a grammatical section and a dictionary.

The pioneering efforts in developing the Kaqchikel alphabet are attributed to these missionaries, a contribution enduring through the mid-XX century. In the latter half of the XVI century, Father Félix Solano’s work, Vocabulario en lengua castellana y guatemalteca que se llama Cak chi quel chi, emerged. Another work from the same period is Vocabulario copioso de las lenguas cakchikel, y jiche. While it is speculated to be a copy of a work by Dominican fray Benito de Villacañas, who began his mission in Guatemala in 1568, René Acuña posits an alternative theory. Acuña suggests that this work was not composed by Benito de Villacañas and did not originate in Guatemala. Instead, he proposes that it was authored by an anonymous Franciscan friar in the first half of the XVIII century and published in Zapotitlán, Mexico.

In the XVII century, a notable work is Thesaurus verborum, Vocabulario de la lengua cakchiquel, vel Guatimalteca Nuevamente hecho y recopilado con summo estudio, trabajo y erudición by fray Thomás de Coto. The surviving copy is incomplete, leaving room for speculation as to whether the author lacked the time to finalize his work or if only a portion has been preserved. Notably, the text frequently alludes to appendices, yet no appendices associated with the work have been identified. During the latter half of the XVII century, the Dominican fray Francisco Ximénez produced the dictionary Bocabulario de la Lengua Cakchiquel. Additionally, another work by fray Ximénez, Arte de las tres lenguas Q’aq’chiquel, Quiche y Tz’utuhil, was published in 1701.

In 1743, Guatemala attained the status of an Archbishopric, and the Kaqchikel language was elevated to the position of “the metropolitan tongue” ^{[17, p. 347]}. Exactly a decade later, in 1753, the renowned work Arte de la lengua metropolitana del Reyno Cakchikel o Guatemalico, con un paralelo de las lenguas de los Reynos Kiche, Cakchikel y Tz’utuhil, que hoy integran el Reyno de Guatemala by Fray Ildefonso Joseph Flores was published. In 1794, Father Estevan Torresano’s work Arte de la lengua Cakchiquel also made its appearance.

In the latter half of the XIX century, the Grammaire de la langue quiché by French abbot Etienne-Charles Brasseur de Bourbourg was published. This work was dedicated to the description of three closely related languages: K’iche’, Kaqchikel, and Tzutujil. It includes translations of Rabinal Achi and Vocabulario de las principales raízes o fuentes de que salen los tres dialectos guatemalanos, quiché, cakchiquel y tzutuhil, con una traducción española y francesa y comparación etimológica de unos vocablos con las lenguas germánicas. Towards the end of the 19th century, Daniel Brinton’s A Grammar of the Cakchiquel Language of Guatemala was published. This work is a translation of a collection of previously unknown manuscripts that delve into the description of the Kaqchikel language dating back to the XVII century. These manuscripts were presented to the Library of the American Philosophical Society in 1836 by Señor Mariano Galvez, then the Governor of Guatemala ^{[17, p. 349]}.

3. Lexical meaning of ux and its traces in modern Kaqchikel

3.1. Ux in Colonial dictionaries

Fray Ximénez in his Arte de las tres lenguas... says: “Este verbo [it means sum, es, fui] no tiene propia voz en esta lengua, como en la latina...” (“This verb has not the proper word in this language as [it has] in Latin”) ^{[13, p. 17]}. The author says that previous grammars considered ux as ‘ser’ (‘to be’ in Spanish) and q’o as ‘estar’ (‘to be located, stand’ in Spanish).

In the part ‘Del verbo substantivo. Sum, es, fui’ fray Flores says that there isn’t a special word for the idea of sum, es, fui [Flores 1753: 59]. But still indicates that it is either null either expressed by two means. First, different meanings are expressed by different forms: vx ‘ser’, k’oh or k’ohe ‘estar’. Second, one form for different meanings: k’oh for ‘haver, estar, tener’ ^{[14, p. 59]}. However, the author does not explain why the predicate k’oh can have the form k’ohe for ‘estar’ in the first way to express the Latin notion of sum, es, fui but it has only one form k’oh in the second way. Moreover, the difference between ‘haver’ and ‘tener’ among meanings of k’oh remains unclear. One can figure out that ‘haver’ can mean the grammatical use of ‘to have’ and ‘tener’ is for the lexical possession verb.

In ^{[21, p. 263]}, it is noted that the form ux can be complex. The author thinks that it is a passivization of another verb uh with a passive marker -x. Professor Stoll suggests the hypothesis that the verb uh denotes ‘to generate.’ However, precisely this form has not been found in the dictionaries of the Colonial period.

The only form that can be found in ^{[12],[13],[14]}, and ^[15], is ux. The dictionaries provide its definition as ‘grinding stone, sharpening stone’ or ‘ser.’

An interesting fact is that in all the examined dictionaries, there is a lexeme with exactly the same set of meanings: ca (or ka).

3.2. Possible etymology and meaning of ux

The Colonial K’iche’ (the closest related language to Kaqchikel) text Popol Vuh also contains non-verbal clauses with ux that can be translated as ‘become’ (9). The Missionary orthographic tradition has some specific symbols: 4 for k’ in modern OKMA orthography; 4, – for tz’, 4c for ch’ and Ɛ for q’. But for the purposes of simplicity, I replaced them with new characters.

(9) a. jusuk’ nima’q juyub’ x-ux-ik

at_once big mountain compl-become-ss

‘Straightaway great mountains came to be.’ ^{[22, p. 230]}

b. ta ch-ux-oq xa lab’e

irr pot-become-ss only mistake

‘Then let it become merely mistake.’ ^{[22, p. 480]}

The modern K’iche’ verb uxik (ux and status suffix -ik) ‘become’ and Q’eqchi’ verb uxk ‘happen, be realized, become’ (10) seem to be related with Colonial Kaqchikel ux. They are not used as a copula but as an independent lexeme with its own semantics.

(10) na’-ux-k len tijok sa’ k’iche’

inc-happen-ss quot prayer pre mountain

‘They say that ceremonies are held in the mountains.’ ^{[23, p. 185]}

Also, the modern interrogative word atux meaning ‘what’ is derived from the verb ux (2sg.abs at and ux).

So, the possible meaning of ux can be interpreted as ‘become, happen.’

4. The Colonial Kaqchikel non-verbal predication

4.1. Structural and semantic types

Two primary structural types of non-verbal clauses exist in Colonial Kaqchikel: copulaless (11) and copular constructions (12). Copulaless constructions consist of two N(ominal)P(hrases) (or a pronoun and an NP), where one functions as a referent NP and the other as a predicative NP. They are linked through juxtaposition. On the other hand, copular clauses are more intricate, with the two NPs connected through a copular element.

(11) yn utz

I good

‘I am good’ ^{[17, p. 373]}

(12) k’a ruyon ok umul tz’iquin k’oh

pst only part rabbit bird exs

‘then only rabbits and birds were here’ ^{[17, p. 66]}

A correlation between the semantic type of the non-verbal predicate and the structural type of the clause can be identified. Non-verbal clauses with an existential (13), locative (14), and possessive (15) nature incorporate the k’oh/k’o copular element.

(13) k’oh chiri e mulan conohel

exs there 3pl.abs together all

amaq’ ahlabal chi palouh

village warrior pre sea

‘There were gathered together the warriors of all the seven villages at the sea.’ ^{[17, p. 78]}

(14) xae chay chi chicop etam-ayon k’o vi

only obsidian pre animal know-ptp exs part

ri echa pam Paxil

def food pre Pashil

‘Only the Obsidian Beast knew that there was food in a place called Pashil (Guatemala).’ ^{[17, p. 68]}

(15) chinak k’oh u cheen

who exs 3sg.pos power

‘Who has the power (who can)?’ ^{[17, p. 78]}

In contrast, other semantic types of non-verbal predications [Haspelmath 2022], such as classificational (16), equational (17), attributional (18), and appertentive clauses (19), typically do not employ any copular element.

(16) yn yn ah-pop

1sg.abs 1sg.abs agt-king

‘I am a king.’ ^{[8, p. 107]}

(17) yn y-lab, qu-ix-cam

1sg.abs 2pl.pos-harbinger opt-2pl.abs-die

‘I am your harbinger [of your death], you shall die.’ ^{[8, p. 77]}

(18) in vtz

1sg.abs good

‘I am good.’ ^{[13, p. 17]}

(19) hun nabey-al hun k’a ch’ipil-al ch-iv-ichin

one first-nmlz one and youngest_son-nmlz pre-2pl.pos-rn

‘One chief and one junior are yours.’ ^{[8, p. 76]}

4.2. Tense/aspect/mood marking

The copula serves a dual purpose. On the one hand, it is intended to establish relations of predication between the subject and the non-verbal predicate, in cases where the latter cannot do so independently. On the other hand, the copula provides means of tense/aspect/mood (TAM) contextualization for the non-verbal predicate. Since in Colonial Kaqchikel, non-verbal predicates (excluding existential, locative, and possessive) could directly enter predicative relations with the subject, they had a limited set of contextualization means available.

In the history of the Kaqchikel language, four methods of TAM-contextualization can be identified. A morphological mean, direct verbalization (when NVP can incorporate aspectual morphology); two syntactical means, the copula ux and special particles, and a lexical mean – adverbs.

It should be noted that the direct verbalization of positional predicates is still encountered today, representing a common means of TAM-contextualization (20), just because positional roots can form all types of stems, including verbal stems. They constitute a distinct lexical class in Mayanist descriptional tradition. Positional predicates are formed by a special type of roots – positional roots. The latter cannot be used in free form; to create a lexeme, they must undergo derivation. According to ^{[24, p. 223]}, positional roots can describe the position in space, the shape or state of an object, and also indicate the absence of movement. In ^{[25, p. 116]}, it is pointed out that transitive bases formed by positional roots denote the creation of an object in the shape specified by the semantics of the positional root or the action of placing an object of the specified shape in space. Intransitive bases formed by positional roots indicate that something acquires the specified shape. Substantive bases derived from positional roots denote objects of the specified shape or occupying the specified position. Adjective bases formed from positional roots indicate that the object is in a state described by the positional root.

In addition to TAM-morphology, the stem also takes the suffix -e’. This derivation means that the object takes the position indicated by the positional root. However, non-verbal predicates derived from other lexical classes have lost this capability. Presumably, it was possible in the 16th century, but it is not found in later sources.

(20) a. in raq’-ar-ik

1sg.abs lean-adj-nmlz

‘I am leaning.’ ^{[26, p. 79]}

b. x-raq’-e’

compl-lean-der

‘He/she/it leaned.’ ^{[26, p. 79]}

According to our observations, direct verbalization of non-positional predicates is found in only one source from the 16th century ^[10] (and only for adjectives) (21).

(21) x-utz-in kaj x-utz-in ulew r-umal

compl-good-vrblz sky compl-good-vrblz earth 1sg.pos-rn

x-utz-in q’ij

compl-good-vrblz light/day

‘{God} made the sky, he made the earth, and he made the light.’ ^{[10, f. 3, 1st line on the left site]}

In (21) F. Vico used the verbalized form of the adjective utz ‘good’ with the verbalizer -in to make a transitive form (the 3rd sg ergative marker is omitted in (21) due to phonological reasons and the 3rd absolutive is always null). The resulting meaning of utzin can be interpreted as ‘make good, make perfect.’

It is also important to highlight that in some languages related to Kaqchikel, such as Q’eqchi’, this method of contextualization remains productive even today (22).

(22) naq t-in-nim-an-q laa’in-aq aj b’olotz oq

when pot-1sg.abs-big-ap-ss 1sg.pro-ss clf football_player

‘When I grow up I will become a football player.’ ^{[23, p. 17]}

The particles are primarily placed between the absolutive clitic and the non-verbal predicate (23). Adverbs, as a rule, typically follow the non-verbal predicate (24).

(23) at naek vtz

2sg.abs part good

‘You were good.’ ^{[13, p. 17]}

(24) a. in vtz oher

1sg.abs good yesterday

‘I was good yesterday.’ ^{[13, p. 18]}

b. in vtz chuac/cabih

1sg.abs good tomorrow/day_after_tomorrow

‘I will be good tomorrow/the day after tomorrow.’ ^{[13, p. 18]}

Adverbs and particles as means of contextualization have been present throughout the history of the Kaqchikel language from the Colonial period to the present day. The verb ux disappears, presumably, in the XVIII-XIX centuries. Moreover, grammars from the second half of the XIX century that mention it reproduce earlier texts (e.g., ^[16],[8], and ^[17]). By the early XX century, the verb ux is no longer encountered (e.g., ^[18] and ^[19]) (Table 1).

Table 1. Means of TAM-marking in the history of Kaqchikel language

4.3. Ux as a non-verbal construction modifier

The non-verbal predicates can employ the verb ux to introduce aspectual and/or modal nuances to the predication. This verb has the capability to modify various types of non-verbal clauses, including existential (25), possessive (26), classificational (27), equational (28), attributional (29), and appertentive (30). However, in the examined corpus, there were no examples found where the verb ux modifies locative non-verbal constructions. This could indicate either that the verb ux cannot modify locative constructions in principle, or simply that there are no such examples in the corpus. In any case, further investigation is needed.

(25) oxlahuh achij, cahlahuh

thirteen men fourteen

k’a ixok x-ux

so women compl-cop

‘So, there were thirteen men, fourteen women.’ ^{[8, p. 68]}

(26) x-e-k’uluk’u he k’a cay

compl-3pl.abs-merry 3pl.pro so two

ri xhayil hun x-ux

def wife one compl-cop

‘And they got married, and each had two wives.’ ^{[8, p. 68]}

(27) mani k’a r-u quiquel

neg so 3sg.pos-rn blood

r-u tiohil x-ux

3sg.pos-rn body compl-cop

‘And he was not [made] of flesh and blood.’ ^{[8, p. 68]}

(28) xa at r-etal çaq’ih t-ux

only 2sg.abs 3sg.pos-sign spring pot-cop

‘You are just a sign of spring.’ ^{[8, p. 76]}

(29) ki-tzih nim a q’ih t-ø-ux

intens-speak big 2sg.pos wealth pot-3sg.abs-cop

‘Truly great must be your wealth.’ ^{[8, p. 74]}

(30) vuetah m-ix-vikah ree xit,

if inc-2pl.abs-pay_tribute dem jade

puak, q’uq’uraxom, bix y-e-q’etah,

silver feather_items song inc-3pl.abs-curse

r-uma xavi k’a yv-ichin t-ux

3sg.pos-rn only so 2pl.pos-rn pot-cop

‘If you give jade, silver, feather items as tribute, you will only receive songs of hatred (then the songs of hatred will be yours).’ ^{[8, p. 77]}

The first thing we should pay attention to is that the verb ux always takes the final position. In existential and possessive clauses, it replaces k’o, but still occurs in the right position. Even though ux is a verb, it never occupies the prototypical predicate position (left). It is obviously an intransitive verb since it has no ergative markers. Moreover, it seems that ux has no special lexical meaning.

There are 5 forms of the verb ux in the entire text of The Annals of the Kaqchikels ^[8] with 3 aspectual/mood markers: completive (3rd singular xux and 3rd plural xeux), potential (3rd singular tux), and incompletive (1st singular intransitive quinux and 2nd singular intransitive catux). In the text, all these forms occur with different frequencies. The entire text under study contains about 14,800 words. The verb ux occurs 46 times. The most frequent is its completive use (22 forms), then goes the potential use (14 forms), and the less frequent is the incompletive use (10 forms) (Table 2).

Table 2. Frequency of use of ux forms

It seems that the “most equative” is the incompletive use (31, 32, 33).

(31) yn ah-queh, yn ah-cab qu-in-ux

1sg.abs agt-venison 1sg.abs agt-honey inc-1sg.abs-cop

{O thou lord, I will give thee the venison and the honey, [because]}‘I am the owner of venison and the owner of honey.’ ^{[8, p. 92]}

(32) maquian at nu hay

neg 2sg.abs 1sg.pos house

nu chinamit c-at-ux

1sg.pos tribe inc-2sg.abs-cop

‘You are not of my house, not of my tribe.’ ^{[8, p. 86]}

(33) chinak c-at-ux

who inc-2sg.abs-cop

‘Who are you?’ ^{[8, p. 86]}

The affirmative forms use double absolutive: one is a clitic used with a non-verbal, other is a prefix used with ux (31, 32). The interrogative forms do not repeat the absolutive (33). The difference between copulaless non-verbal clauses and clauses with incompletive ux is that the verb ux appears to make the non-verbal predicate more communicatively emphasized. The difference between (31, 32, 33) and (34) lies in the use of different means of emphasis: syntactical (31, 32, 33) and lexical (34).

(34) ki-tzih vi chi at nu-chaq’, nu-nimal

intens-speak part pre 2sg.abs 1sg.pos-brother 1sg.pos-elder

‘Truly you are my brother, my elder.’ ^{[8, p. 86]}

The completive forms of ux are intended mainly to help the non-verbal predicate express tense(past)/aspectual meanings (25). The potential forms are means to express tense(future)/modal meanings (30).

5. Conclusion

The verb ux functions as a true copula since it has no inherent valency, does not contribute lexical meaning to the clause, and does not occupy a structural predicate position (instead, it “advances” the non-verbal element to a predicative position).

The use of the verb ux with non-verbal predicates is limited to certain contexts: it imparts aspectual and/or modal (i.e., grammatical) meaning to the non-verbal clause.

The verb ux can modify all semantic types of non-verbal clauses (maybe with exception of locative). In existential and possessive clauses, it replaces k’o/k’oh while taking the final (right) position.

A decrease in the amount of TAM-marking means was revealed in the history of Kaqchikel language. Starting from four non-verbal predicates TAM-marking strategies in XVI century, to three in XVII-XIX with no direct verbalization, to only adverbs and particles in XX-XXI with no more copula ux.

In all examined colonial-period dictionaries, the verb ux is defined as ‘grinding stone, sharpening stone’ or ‘to be.’ However, the lexeme ca (ka) also carries the same set of meanings. In contemporary Kaqchikel, the lexeme ka’ also means ‘grinding stone, sharpening stone.’

The verb ux is present in modern Kaqchikel, as part of other lexemes (e.g., interrogative word atux ‘what’).

List of abbreviations:

1, 2, 3 – first, second, third person

abs – absolutive

adj – adjectivizer

agt – agentive

clf – classifier

compl – completive

cop – copula

def – definite article

dem – demonstrative

der – derivation

exs – existential

inc – incompletive

indef – indefinite article

intens – intensifier

irr – irrealis

neg – negation

nmlz – nominalizer

opt – optative

part – particle

pl – plural

pos – possessive

pot – potential

pre – preposition

pro – pronoun

pst – past

ptp – participle

quot – quotative

rn – relational noun

sg – singular

ss – status suffix

vrblz – verbalizer