Plain versus Relative Completive: Presupposition

The plain and relative completives can describe the same completed event while organizing information differently. Sun sayi mota neutrally asserts that they bought a car; Mota ce suka saya selects a car against alternatives and normally backgrounds the proposition that they bought something. This backgrounding is often described as presupposition, but the term must be used carefully: syntax licenses the relative form, and not every use of the paradigm carries the same pragmatic effect.

All unlabelled examples are (neutral Nigerian Standard Hausa). English tense labels are especially misleading here because both Hausa forms can be translated by a simple past, while stative predicates can yield present translations.

Two affirmative paradigms

The lexical verb gani “see” remains the same. The contrast appears in the agreeing subject–TAM marker.

Speech distinguishes the singular pairs through tone, but ordinary Nigerian Standard boko does not write that information. The spelling ya gani alone cannot tell you which paradigm is present; clause structure and discourse do.

Both are past in this context because da yamma and the discourse locate the sighting. Plain sun versus relative suka changes the information structure, not the calendar time by itself.

What presupposition means in a focus construction

In Ɓarawon ne suka gani, the main new claim identifies the person seen as the thief. The remainder—roughly “they saw someone”—is treated as background that speaker and listener can accept for the purpose of the exchange. It may have been mentioned explicitly, or the listener may accommodate it on hearing the sentence.

The alternatives—money, documents, or something else—are at issue. The taking event is backgrounded. This explains why the relative form is often called a presuppositional or focus perfective.

But do not reverse the explanation into “whenever an event is old information, use suka.” A neutral reply can repeat an already known event with plain sun, and an explicit fronted focus construction selects relative morphology even when the listener must accommodate its background.

Relative clauses restrict an already introduced domain

An identifying relative clause also places its proposition outside the main assertion:

The sentence’s main assertion is that the speaker read a particular report. Da suka aiko jiya helps identify it and normally treats the sending as usable background. Compare the independent assertion:

The event can be real and known in either sentence. The difference is which proposition the grammar makes central. In the relative clause, the sending helps restrict rahoton; in the plain clause, sending the report is the assertion itself.

Marked relative clauses complicate the picture. Parenthetical additions, explicit uncertainty, and modal material can change what is taken for granted and can license general TAM forms in advanced usage. That is why “all clauses after da mechanically take the relative form” and “relative form always means shared knowledge” are both too strong.

Questions ask for a value, not always for a past event

A fronted constituent question normally uses the relative paradigm in its out-of-focus clause:

These questions typically take the event frame for granted and request the missing value. Yet asking a question does not mean the speaker knows its answer, nor does it guarantee a philosophically inviolable presupposition. A cautious speaker can question or cancel the assumption in further discourse. The grammatical generalization is that the standard fronted wh-construction selects the relative TAM series.

By contrast, a polar question tests the whole proposition and can retain the plain form:

This contrast shows why “all questions take relative forms” is wrong. Question type matters.

Stative predicates expose the tense fallacy

Relative morphology can background or restrict an established state rather than a past event:

English uses present know. Relative suka/ya marks the focus or relative environment plus completive viewpoint; the stative predicate supplies the current-state interpretation. In a past narrative, the same ya san could be “who knew.”

Active predicates behave differently:

This is a bounded active event, explicitly placed yesterday. Do not infer English tense from the marker before considering aktionsart and time adverbials.

Narrative and temporal uses limit a single presupposition theory

The relative-completive form also advances historical narrative: muka shiga, muka zauna, muka fara magana. Those foreground events are often the newest part of the story, not backgrounded presuppositions. Likewise, forms such as lokacin da suka iso can identify a specific temporal boundary.

This use is explained fully on completive in narrative sequences. Its existence is crucial: the shared paradigm has several grammaticalized distributions. Presupposition illuminates relative, focus, and wh backgrounds, but it does not erase the distinct narrative or temporal functions.

Negation neutralizes the positive form contrast

Negative completive uses forms such as ban, bai, ba ta, ba mu, ba ku, ba su, ba a with final ba. A focused or relative construction can still organize assertion and background even though positive muka/suka/aka disappears.

The surrounding syntax preserves focus or modification. Do not invent ba suka kawo ba in an attempt to keep the positive relative marker visible.

Practice: identify what is at issue

For each sentence, decide whether the event proposition is the main neutral assertion or background to a selected value.

1. Sun buɗe shagon da safe. Main assertion: opening the shop; plain sun.
2. Da safe ne suka buɗe shagon. Selected value: the time; relative suka.
3. Wane shago suka buɗe? Selected value: which shop; relative suka.
4. Sun buɗe shagon? Whole proposition questioned; plain sun is possible.
5. Shagon da suka buɗe yana kusa. The opening identifies the shop; relative suka.

Common Mistakes

1. Treating relative morphology as a synonym for past tense.

2. Using the relative form merely because information was mentioned earlier.

3. Keeping the plain plural after explicit object focus.

4. Assuming every question has the same TAM requirement.

5. Preserving positive suka under negation.

Key Takeaways

• Plain completive normally carries a neutral main assertion; relative completive appears in marked relative, focus, and fronted wh environments.
• The relative construction often backgrounds a proposition and selects one value from alternatives, which motivates the presupposition analysis.
• Presupposition is not a free morphological switch and does not explain every narrative or temporal occurrence.
• Polar questions can keep the plain form; constituent questions normally select the relative form.
• Active versus stative meaning and time context determine whether English uses past, present, or another tense.
• Positive plain–relative contrasts are largely neutralized in the negative completive.