Particles “ar”, “ts”, “ki” in the Georgian Language and their Counterparts in the English Language

In the Georgian scientific literature the functions of particles "კი" ("ki") and "ც" ("ts")  are mainly considered in the positive context. Moreover, they are discussed in association with verbs [Shanidze, 1988:610, 613; Jorbenadze... 1984:140-141]. Formation of a nominal negation concerns only affixes "უ-ო, უ-ურ" (u-o, u-ur) and the negative prefix "არა" (ara) [Jorbenadze,... 1984:136-149].

The given paper makes an attempt to prove, that the Georgian language distinguishes two types of negation on the level of a syntagm: verbal and nominal. The functions of "ც" and "კი" particles in the negative contexts are also revealed: "ც" provides the model of scale predication [Horn, 1989:121-174], while "კი" introduces presupposition. Moreover, the given paper deals with the lexical means, which facilitate the expression of the same functions in the English language..

Our research was carried out on the basis of the comparative analysis of the Georgian and  English languages. The empirical material was presented by the Georgian and corresponding English literary texts. Moreover, the method of functional analysis was used, which discussed an object of the research in the situational context considering its meanings in different situations.

The study of syntactic and semantic theories of negation has occupied the central position in the linguistics during the last years. Negation is a universal phenomenon, but the ways of its expression and interpretation vary from language to language. The study of the functions of particles is connected with certain difficulties, because they have no grammatical categories and are usually used in different contexts [Arnold, 1982: 283-305, Jespersen, 1992: 91-92]. Particles often express the nuances of a contextual meaning and an addresser's relation towards the expressed idea. Therefore, they have a "huge" pragmatic load and express illocutionary (an intention of an addresser) force by strengthening or reducing it.

The scientists express different ideas about the elements, which can be included in the group of particles. This group was widened via the researches carried out on the level of a text. Nowadays, linguists study the particles of discourse/markers, which contain lexical units and word-combinations. A lot of researches of the English language were dedicated to the study of   their functions in the text. They mostly concerned adverbs, conjunctions: presuppositional aspects of "only" and "even" [Horn, 1969: 98-107], the conditions of usage and licensing of negative polarity particles "yet", "anymore", "either" and "neither" [Levinson, 2008], classification of particles and their semantic features [Hajiyev, 2008: 432-441], the role of scalar features and presupposition in the formation of "even", which has a polar sensitivity [Giannakidou, 2007: 39-81], negation and contrast expressed by the conjunction "but" [Blakemore, 1989: 15-37], etc.

In the Georgian language the combinational forms of the particles "ც"(ts), "კი" (ki) and "არ" (ar) are: "არც" (arts),  "არც კი" (arts ki),  "კი არც" (ki arts),  "... კი არ" (...ts ki ar), "კი ... არ" (ki... ts ar), "კი არ" (ki ar), "... არ" (...ts ar). "ც" can be added to a noun, a verb, an adverb and a particle (არ-), while "კი" stands alone.

According to the dictionary of the morphemes and modal elements of the Georgian language, the particles "ც" and "კი" have different functions. "ც" derives a relative pronoun or an adverb from an interrogative pronoun and an adverb. It emphasizes the meaning of the word and expresses the additivity similarly to the form „აგრეთვე" (agretve) [Jorbenadze... 1988: 454].

The dictionary "tells" nothing about the function of "ც" in the negative context, where this particle may acquire its second and third functions - an intensifier of the negation and an additive operator.

Let's discuss "არც" - the combination of particles "არ" and "". According to the same dictionary, "არც" has the following functions: expression of firm negation, imperative; indication to something, someone or some action that doesn't correspond to the reality; exclusion of the assumption of something; exclusion of multiple units.

It's worth mentioning, that all the above mentioned examples do not refer to the negative context. Moreover, the examples, which are presented in the literature, enable us to single out additional functions and contextual meanings of the given particle. Namely, the particle "არც" marks and negates the noun.


  1. არც ნათქვამი და არც დასანახი არ გამოეპარებოდა (arts natkvami da arts dasanakhi ar gamoepareboda) [Shatberashvili, 1985:85].
    Nothing could escape his sight or hearing [Shatberashvili, 1978:60].
    In the English language the Georgian double negation is expressed by the negative pronoun "nothing".
    Particle "არც" can be used in the combination with the negative particle "არ":
  2. სადაც სიკვდილი არ შეაბოტებს, იქ ხომ არც სიცოცხლეა (sadats sikvdili ar sheabotebs, ik khom arts sitsotskhlea) [Shatberashvili, 1985:38].
    Where there is no life there is no death. [Shatberashvili, 1978:26]
    In this case, the Georgian nominal negation is expressed by a private negation "no life".
    "არ...არც" may express an additivity in the negative context:
  3. სოფლის გზაზე ძეხორციელი არ ჭაჭანებდა. არც ეზოებში ჩანდა ვინმე... (Soplis gzaze dzekhortsieli ar chachanebda. Arts ezoebshi chanda vinme... ) [Shatberashvili, 1985:25].
    Not a single soul was to be seen on the village road. Nobody could be seen in the yards either [Shatberashvili, 1978:17].
    A private negation "არც ეზოებში" is expressed by "either" in the English sentence.
  4. ...ჯერ არც თვითონ სჯერა, თუ მის წინ სოფლის თვალი და იმედი კოხტა თენგო ბიჭი ასვენია (Jer arts tviton sjera, tu mis tsin soplis tvali da imedi kokhta tengo bichi asvenia) [Shatberashvili, 1985:132]
    ....Even he himself could not believe yet, that Tengo, the pride and hope of the whole village, was lying dead before him. [Shatberashvili, 1978:98].
    The firm negation is expressed with the negative modality "could not" and the adverb "even" that marks the agent expressed by the pronoun ("he").
    The particle "არც" provides the model of a cognitive scale with predicates in an increasing/decreasing sequence. The particle negates the minimal unit of the scale [Fauconnier 1975: 188-99].
  5. ჩემსკენ არც გამოუხედავს (Chemsken arts gamoukhedavs) [Dolenjashvili, 2005:12].
    He didn't even look at me  [Dolenjashvili, 2006:141].
    The Georgian "არც გამოუხედავს" implies, that the context considered the possible action "გამოხედვა" ("to look"). In the English sentence it is expressed by an adverb and a verbal negation "n't even".
    Besides a nominal negation, the particle "არც" in "co-operation" with an adverb of time may express a temporal aspect of negation.
  6. ასეთი რამ არ მომხდარა...თუმცა ასეთი რამ არც არასდროს მომხდარა (aseti ram ar momkhdara... tumtsa aseti ram arts arasdros momkhdara (conv.).
    Nothing like this has happened ... hence, something like this has never happened.
    Particle "არც" expresses the negation of the minimal amount:
  7. არც ერთს არ დაუხუჭავს თვალი ჩვეულებრივი სიკვდილით, საკუთარ ტახტზე (arts erts ar daukhuchavs tvali chveulebrivi sikvdilit, sakutar takhtze) [Shatberashvili, 1985:6].
    Neither died a natural death in his own bed [Shatberashvili, 1978:3].
    The negation expressed by the English lexical items - "no", "nothing", "even...not", "n't even", "would not", "neither", "either", "neither...nor" - corresponds to the Georgian "არც".
    According to the dictionary of the morphemes and modal elements of the Georgian language, the particle "კი" has the following functions: affirmative, strengthening, opposing, doubting [Jorbenadze... 1988: 260].
    In this case, the functions of "კი" are discussed in the positive context. Hence, this particle may express strengthening and opposive functions in the negative one. Moreover, in the combination  "არც კი",  "კი" negates something that is presupposed by the context:
    "არც კი დაფიქრებულა" - arts ki dapikrebula (did not even think to himself) (conv.). This phrase expresses an expectation of the minimal action "thinking", which did not happen in reality.
  8. მაგრამ კალატოზს ზემოთ არც კი აუხედავს, არც არაფერი უთქვამს, თითქოს თავადის ხმა არც გაეგონოს... (Magram kalatozs zemot arts ki aukhedavs, arts araperi utkvams, titkos tavadis khma arts gaegos [Shatberashvili, 1985:12].
    But the mason did not even look up, he did not utter a word, it was as he had not even heard the Prince's voice. [Shatberashvili, 1978:8].
    The given sentence implies an expectation, that the mason would react on the prince's words and look at him, but he did not do that. Therefore, the minimal expected action is denied. In the English version the negation is expressed by means of a negative particle (a verbal negation) and an adverb "n't even".
  9. -რა ვქნა, რითი დაგარწმუნო, რომ მე არც კი შევსულვარ მირცას ოთახში!  ( - Ra vkna, riti dagartsmuno, rom me arts ki shevsulvar Mirtsas otakhshi)  [Jandieri, 1999: 41].
    How can I prove that I never entered Mirtsa's room. [Jandieri, 2006:53]
    It is supposed, that the speaker has not had a contact with Mirtsa. "The entrance into her room" is regarded as a minimal action. In the English language the adverb "never" is used.
  10. გათენებას აღარაფერი აკლდა, ღვინის სმაში შეჯიბრებული ყმაწვილკაცობა კი ჯერ ადგომას არც კი აპირებდა (gatenebas agharaperi aklda, ghvinis smashi shejibrebuli kmatsvilkatsoba ki jer adgomas arts ki apirebda) [Kldiashvili, 1989: 68].
    It was near dawn, but the young people carried away by a drinking competition, showed no intention of ending the feast [Kldiashvili, 2003: 134].
    In the first case, „ყმაწვილკაცობის" is marked by the particle "კი", while "არც კი" negates the minimal expected action - „ყმაწვილკაცობა გამთენიისას მაინც უნდა დაშლილიყო" (the young people would end the feast near down). In this case, the English version presents a private negation "no".
    All the above mentioned examples indicate, that "არც კი" expresses the negation of minimal units of expected actions. In the corresponding English texts we meet the following lexical items: "n't even", "no", "never", etc.
    It's worth mentioning, that the same particles are met in the transpositional form"კი არც":
  11. მამაჩემი ნაწყენი იქნება, - თქვა მან ჩურჩულით. - დღეს მასთან ერთად უნდა მეთოხნა სიმინდი...მე კი არც გამიფრთხილებია, ისე წამოვედი ამ დილით (Mamachemi natskeni ikneba, - tkva man churchulit. - dghes mastan ertad unda metokhna simindi... me arts ki gamiprtkhilebia, ise tsavedi am dilit) [Shatberashvili, 1985:78].
    We were supposed to hoe the maize together today and I left this morning without even warning him [Shatberashvili, 1978:55].
    In this case, the particle "კი" marks a subject/agent, while "არც" negates contextually expected minimal action performed by him/her (warning his/her father). In the English version the same is expressed by the combination of a preposition and an adverb: "without even".
    In case of the combination "... კი არ" (...ts ki ar), the particle "ც" is added to the noun for marking and negating it. Therefore, the nominal negation marked with the particle "ც" is presented: 
  12. სახელი კი არ ვიცი მისი" (conv.).
    I don't know even his/her name.
    In this case, we can create a model of a cognitive scale containing the information about a particular person (with the minimal unit "to know his name"):
    xmin    -    x1    -    x2    -    x3    -    x4    -    xn    -    xmax
    to know the name                                                                                to possess maximal information about the person
    "To know the name" corresponds to the scale xmin,  which means "to know everything about the person". Other scales can be described in the following way: x1 - ‘to know his name and surname', x2 - ‘to know his marital status', x3 - ‘to know his occupation', x4 - ‘to know his past', etc.
  13. ბედმა მისთვის სიკვდილი კი არ გაიმეტა ... (Bedma mistvis sikvdilits ki ar gaimeta...) [Shatberashvili, 1985:139].
    Fate would not even let her die quietly. [Shatberashvili, 1978:103].
    The worse supposed by the fate is the death - even it is denied in this case.
  14. გავშრი, მე რა უნდა მეთქვა, ეგ კაცი თვალითა კი არ მინახავს-მეთქი (Gavshri, me ra unda metkva, eg katsi tvalitats ki ar minakhavs-metki) [Jandieri, 42].
    I was speechless. What could I say? I said that I had never seen that person. [Jandieri, 2006: 54].
    In this case, the Georgian sentence contains the firm negation "თვალითა კი არ მინახავს". The corresponding version replaces it with the negative adverb "never".
    Therefore, in the English sentences "... კი არ" is mainly replaced with "not/n't even" and "never".
    The copmbination "კი ... არ" emphasizes the agent and negates a minimal unit of the actions envisaged by the context:
  15. მას კი თავი არ აუწევია (Mas ki tavits ar autsevia) (conv.).
    He didn't even raise the head.
    In this sentence the particle "კი" marks an agent, while the scale presents actions, which are relevant to this situation: "to welcome", "to stand up", "to say hello" ... "to raise the head". A minimal action of the scale is denied.
  16. ზაქარიას კი მოკლულის წილი, ქამარ-ხანჯალი და გაქონილი ჩოხა-ქურქი არ ეყო ვალის ასანაზღაურებლად  (Zakarias ki moklulis tsili, kamar-khanjali da gakonili chokha-kurkits ar eko valis asanazghaureblad) [Javakhishvili, 1958:51].
    ...while Zakro had had to sell off his late partner's share together with this dagger and belt, as well as his worn felt cloack to repay all the debts, but still it hadn't been enough [Javakhishvili, 2009:51].
    In the English version the negation "კი ... არ" is expressed by "never", "but still ... n't".
    The combination "კი არ" expresses an opposition to a positive pair of a sentence:
  17. რამე გევნებათ კი არა, თუ დამიჯერებ, სასარგებლოც იქნება (Rame gevnebat ki ara, tu damijereb, sasargeblots ikneba)[Kldiashvili, 1989:12].
    Believe me, instead of harm, I'll be useful, really...[Kldiashvili, 2003:122]
    In this case we have an oppositional pair: "harmful - useful". Moreover, the combination "კი არ" introduces an oppositional unit "სასარგებლო" ("useful"). It is similar to the comparative conjuction "არამედ" (aramed), but the concepts expressed by them differ functionally. "არამედ" doesn't introduce the opposition. It simply specifies the information. Moreover, "არამედ" negates qualitative indicators, while "კი არ" denies an oppositional unit:
  18. კაცი... თავდაჯერებული თვლიდა, რომ ხეები ეზოში უწესრიგოდ კი არ იყვნენ დარ-გულნი, არამედ ყველაფერს დიდი კანონზომიერების ხელი აჩნდა" (Katsi... tavdajerebuli tvlida, rom kheebi ezoshi utsesrigod ki ar ikvnen dargulni, aramed kvelapers didi kanonzomierebis kheli achnda [Dochanashvili, 1976:117].
    In this case the existence of trees is not denied, only their location is specified (qualitative characteristics).
    Moreover, the combination "კი არ" expresses additivity and confirmation of the fact:
  19. ... სათქმელს ეზოში მოფუსფუსე ცოლს კი არა, სოფლის ბოლოში მცხოვრებ ტიკინესაც მიუწვდენდა  (... satkmels ezoshi mopuspuse tsols ki ara, soplis boloshi mtskhovreb tikinesats miutsvdenda) [Shatberashvili, 1985: 49].
    ... and if he did have something to say, his voice was loud enough to be heard even at the other end of the village [Shatberashvili, 1978:35].
    The paraphrase: his voice was heard by his wife and Tikine.
    The negation expressed by the particle "კი არ" corresponds to the English "not ... but". The positive connotation with the function of additivity is expressed by the adverb "even".
    The combination "... არ" negates the minimal amount of the unit, which adds the particle "":
    „სიტყვაც არ დასცდენია" (sitkvats ar dastsdenia) (conv.)
    He/She did not say even a word.
    This sentence implies, that there were no dialogues. There was not said anything - a sentence, a phrase, even a word (a minimal communicative unit).
  20. ...ცხენი ისევ იმავე ადგილას იდგა, ფეხსა არ იცვლიდა (Tskheni isev imave adgilas idga, pekhsats ar itsvlida) [Kldiashvili, 1989: 37].
    The horse ignored all this, it just sood there, not budging an inch. [Kldiashvili, 1989:128].
    In this case a minimal unit of movement is denied. In the English version it is expressed by a minimal unit of length.
  21. ჯამაგირი პაპიროსის ფულადა არ ეყოფა"  (Jamagiri papirosis puladats ar ekopa) [Shatbe-rashvili, 1985:84].
    His salary will not even buy his tobacco [Shatberashvili, 1978:60].
    It is contextually supposed that you can buy a cigarette by the minimal amount of money. If   you can't buy a cigarette, you won't be able to buy anything else. 
  22. ...იქნებ სულა არ მოსულა წუხელ?  (ikneb sulats ar mosula tsukhel?) [Shatberashvili, 1985:128].
    "Maybe he didn't come home at all last night?" [Shatberashvili, 1978:94].
    In this case, the sentence implies the supposition, that a character will not see a person in question, because he/she has not come home. In the English version the particle "" is substituted by the adverb "at all". 
    Therefore, in the English language the negation "... არ" is mainly expressed by: "n't/not even", "not ... but" (sometimes by: "without even", "n't ... at all", "never", "n't ... yet").
    All the above mentioned indicates to the following functions of the combinations of particles:
    The particle "არც" gives a model of a nominal negation, that is proved by the English examples of a private negation. Moreover, "არც" negates a contextually expected action:     გამარჯობა არც მითხრა - Gamarjoba arts mitkhra  (He/she did not say good-bye).
    The combination "არც კი" negates presupposition introduced by the particle "კი": გამარჯობა არც კი მითხრა - Gamarjoba arts ki mitkhra (He/she did not say even good-bye).
    The  combination "... არ" negates the action of the object/agent marked by the particle "ც":
    ხელიც არ გაუნძრევია - Khelits ar gaundzrevia (He/she did not move a hand/ did nothing).
    In the combination "კი არც" the particle "კი" marks a noun, the particle "არც" negates contextually expected relevant action "to answer": მე კი არც მიპასუხია - Me ki arts mipasukhia (I did not even answer). The context implies, that he/she had to answer.
    In the combination "... კი არ" the particle "ც" marks a noun, while "კი" introduces the presupposition: გამარჯობაც კი არ მითხრა - Gamarjobats ki ar mitkhra (He/she did not say even hello).
    In the combination "კი ... არ" the particle "კი" marks an agent, while "ც" marks a noun (the case of double marking): მან კი გამარჯობაც არ მითხრა - man ki gamarjobats ar mitkhra (He/she did not say even hello).
    The combination "კი არ" introduces qualitative opposition: კი არ გავბრაზდი, მეწყინა - ki ar gavbtazdi, metskina (I was not angry. I was offended). "კი არ" also has a positive denotation with an additive function: არა მარტო ეს, არამედ ისიც - ara marto es, aramed isits (Not only this, but also that). The paraphrase "I will demand the answer from you and from him/her".


N 1.  Meanings of the particles - defined by the dictionary and acquired during the research.


N 2.     The English counterparts of the particles "კი", "", "არ".

   The following lexical units are presented in the parallel English texts:

The studied material reveals, that there are two types of negation in the Georgian language:  nominal and predicate.

In the Georgian language a negation with the particle "ც" introduces a model of an implicational scale with the predicates in increasing/decreasing sequence. Therefore, "ც" negates the minimal unit of the scale.

The particle "არც" expresses: (1) nominal negation; (2) temporal negation; (3) negation of minimal amount; (4) opposition.

The particle "ც" has the following contextual functions: (1) marks nouns and expresses a "private" negation; (2) introduces the scale and negates its minimal unit.

Contextual functions of the particle "კი" are: (1) marks nouns; (2) negates expectation, possibility, presupposition; (3) negates and simultaneously, opposes contradictory elements; (4) expresses additivity (an additive function) in the negative context; (5) expresses additivity (an additive function) with a positive connotation.

In the Georgian language the diversification of negation is achieved not only by the combination of "ც" and "კი" with the main particle "არ", but by their transposition as well.

In the English parallel texts of the above mentioned examples the negation is expressed mostly by adverbs "even" and "never" (independently or  in combination with negation). The adverbs "still", "at all", "yet" (with additional contextual nuances) often associate with them.

It's worth mentioning, that in the English language the negation expressed by "არ", "კი" and "ც" is characterized by lexical diversity. The particle "ც" is often corresponded by the adverb "even". Moreover, in the Georgian language "ც" acquires the meaning only in the combination with other lexical items. The English language expresses the same via lexical items, which have independent semantic meanings. 


Dolenjashvili T.
Fidal or Amina from Three to Five. Bakur Sulakauri publishers. Tbilisi. (in Georgian)
Dochanashvili G.
Hog pawn. Stories. Soviet Georgia. Tbilisi. (in Georgian)
Kldiashvili D.
Samanishvili’s stepmother. Tbilisi. Merani. (in Georgian)
Shanidze A.
The basis of the grammar of the Georgian language. Tbilisi. (in Georgian)
Shatberashvili G.
The Sun for the Dead. Tbilisi. Soviet Georgia. (in Georgian)
Javakhishvili M.
Works in 6 volumes. Volume I. Soviet Georgia.Tbilisi. (in Georgian)
Jandieri K.
The chronicle of the family. Merani. Tbilisi. (in Georgian)
Jorbenadze B.
For the diversity of expressing negative in the Georgian language. The issues of the culture of the Georgian word. Book VI. Metsniereba. Tbilisi. (in Georgian)
Jorbenadze B., Kobaidze M., Beridze M.
The dictionary of the Georgian morphemes and modal elements. Metsniereba. Tbilisi. (in Georgian)
Arnold M.
Clitics and Particles, Source: Language. Vol. 61. No. 2.
Blakemore D.
Denial and Contrast: A Relevance Theoretic Analysis of
Dolenjashvili T.
Fidal or Amina from Three to Five. P.S Literature. Tbilisi.
Fauconnier G.
Polarity and the Scale Principle. Proceeding of the Chicago Linguistic Society.
Giannakidou A.
The Landscape of Even. Natural Language&Linguistic Theory. Vol. 25. No.1.
Hajiyev E.
‘The Status of Particles in Modern English’. International Journal of Computers. Issue 4. Volume 2.
Horn L. R.
A Presuppositional Analysis of
Horn, L. R.
Metalinguistic Negation and Pragmatic Ambiguity. Linguistic Society of America (Mar.).
Jandieri K.
Family Chronicle. P.S Literature. Tbilisi.
Javakhishvili M.
The Devil’s Stone. 12 Short stories. Shemetsneba Publishing House. Tbilisi
Jespersen O.
The Philosophy of Grammar. University of Chicago Press.
Kldiashvili D.
Samanishvili’s Stepmother. New Century. 3’2003. ‘Saari’. Tbilisi.
Levinson D.
Licensing of negative polarity particles yet, anymore, either and neither: combining downward monotonicity and assertivity, Dissertation;