Literal and metaphorical usages of Babanki eat and drink verbs A F R I K A U N D Ü B E RS E E

In Babanki, a Grassfields Bantu language of North-West Cameroon, two of the numerous consumption verbs, namely the generic verbs ʒɨ́ ‘eat’ and ɲʉ́ ‘drink’, constitute a major source of metaphorical extensions outside the domain of ingestion. Setting out from a characterisation of the basic meanings of these two lexical items as they emerge from their paradigmatic relations within the semantic field of alimentation processes, this paper explores the figurative usages of the two verbs and their underlying semantic motivations. Semantic extensions that radiate from eat can be subsumed under two closely related structural metaphors, i.e. appropriation of resources is eating and winning is eating . The first metaphor construes the acquisition and exploitation of non-food items such as material possession as eating, while the second metaphor casts the acquisition of immaterial advantage in the mould of eating. Both metaphors have further entailments, i.e. the derivation of pleasure from consumption of resources, the depletion of resources via consumption and the deprivation of a third party from access to these resources. Semantic extensions that radiate from drink can be accounted for in two structural metaphors, i.e. inhalation is drinking and absorption is drinking. Remarkably, some metaphorical extensions of consumption verbs attested in other African languages, such as extensions of eat for sexual intercourse and for killing, and the extensions of drink for un dergoing trouble and enduring painful experiences are absent in Babanki.


Introduction
In Babanki, a Grassfields Bantu language of North-West Cameroon, the consumption verbs ʒɨ́ 'eat' and ɲʉ́ 'drink' constitute a rich source of metaphorical extensions similar to what is seen crosslinguistically (Williams 1991, Newman 2009, Jaggar & Buba 2009, Song 2009, Naess 2009, Ye 2010, Naess 2011. This is because both concepts relate to very basic human activities which have been recognised to participate actively in metaphorical extensions, and which Newman (1997Newman ( , 2009 identifies as internalisation and transformation of food and drinks. Eating and drinking are basic activities of all human beings required for survival and growth as well as sources of pleasure and sociability. So both concepts seem to be universally lexicalised as consumption verbs that denote the process of taking solid or liquid food into the body through the mouth. More specifically, eating involves "(a) intake of food into the mouth, (b) mastication of the food involving mainly teeth, tongue, and roof of the mouth, (c) swallowing of the masticated food, and (d) sensory experiences on the part of the consumer" (Newman & Aberra 2009: 225). For its part, drinking involves "(a) intake of liquid into the mouth, (b) swallowing of the liquid, and (c) (usually positive) sensory experiences on the part of the consumer." Although these activities are universal, they are not performed in the same way in all communities (Naess 2011). Their universality lies only in the physiological aspects of eating and drinking, i.e. the concept of taking food or drinks from outside into the body using the mouth as a passage (Agyepong, Amfo & Osam 2017: 63). As Ye (2010: 375) observes, "recent cross-linguistic investigation has pointed to both the regularities and variations in the way humans conceptualise the activities of eating and drinking". Languages distinguish between consumption verbs based on the characteristics of an object and/or the manner of its consumption. The distinction in Navajo is based on the characteristics of the object (Rice 2009), while in English, the manner of consumption tends to be considered in the first line. In languages such as English, there is a clear interrelation between the characteristics of the object and the manner of its consumption, i.e. the characteristics, especially the texture entails how an object is consumed. English verbs such as 'crunch ', 'munch', 'gnaw', 'grind', 'slurp' refer to the manner of eating, while necessarily also referring to the quality of the object that is eaten. In Babanki the primary criterion of distinguishing between consumption verbs is the texture of the object which, in turn, determines the manner of consumption.
In this study we explore the semantics of the consumption verbs and examine the connection between the literal and metaphorical uses of the generic consumption verbs ʒɨ́ 'eat' and ɲʉ́ 'drink'. 2 The data reveal that the metaphorical extensions that radiate from eat cover the appropriation of non-food items such as material possessions, emotions such as pleasure derived from exploiting them and their subsequent depletion, while those that radiate from drink refer to processes which involve the internalisation of aeriform or gaseous materials by animate agents and the absorption of liquids into various types of porous substances. To properly explore the uses of these two consumption verbs, ʒɨ́ 'eat' and ɲʉ́ 'drink', this study proceeds in section 2 to present and characterise their basic meanings as they emerge from their paradigmatic relations within the semantic field of alimentation processes at large before discussing their metaphorical and metonymical extensions in section 3. This is followed by a conclusion in section 4.

Consumption verbs
Manners of taking food and drinks into the body through the mouth can be expressed in Babanki by various consumption verbs such as ʒɨ́ 'eat', pfɨ́ʔ 'eat by chewing', ló 'eat by licking', bwólə́ 'eat noisily', ɲʉ́ 'drink', mì 'swallow', ʃwɔŋ 'suck', and lɨ́m 'bite'. As will be shown in section (3) below, only the verbs ʒɨ́ 'eat' and ɲʉ́ 'drink' are singled out from this list in undergoing metaphorical extension. This is because ʒɨ́ 'eat' and ɲʉ́ 'drink' are the prototypical verbs for the ingestion of 2 The data presented and analysed here come from two sources. The first author had five WhatsApp consultation sessions in December 2020 with five other native speakers of Babanki during which they produced most of the examples adapted and presented in this paper. All sessions taken together have the duration of approximately two hours. One session was dedicated to talking about the consumption of food and drinks while the other four focused on the use of the verbs ʒɨ́ 'eat' and ɲʉ́ 'drink' in any context participants could think of. The consumption verbs and metaphorical usages of 'eat' and 'drink' were later extracted and analyzed. The first author also generated examples based on his native speaker competence. Many thanks to Vivian Ba-ah, Regina Phubong, Cornelius Wuchu, Stanley Amuh, and Benjamin Nkwenti for sharing their knowledge of Babanki with us. Any of the other, semantically more specialised, verbs can be used in these contexts with the effect that the texture of the food and the manner of eating it are specified according to the verb's meaning.
Each of the consumption verbs listed above denotes the texture of the object consumed, i.e. hard or soft, depending on whether it is raw, properly or partially cooked, or fried, as well as encoding the specific manner of eating or drinking. An overview of the distinctions is visualised in table (3) where the food items are grouped according to the verbs that typically collocate with them specifying their texture and the way they are consumed.
10 The passion fruit is mostly called 'Adam fruit' in North-West Cameroon.
12 To eat oranges in Cameroon a small lid can be cut away and the juice is sucked out. It is also common for the skin to be peeled off using finger nails or a knife and then breaking little pieces to eat. 13 In order to eat sugarcane in Cameroon, the skin is first peeled off using one's teeth or a knife before breaking the softer inner part into little and chewing to squeeze the juice into the mouth and swallow. The verb pfɨ́ʔ 'eat by chewing' rather describes the act of using a little more effort to masticate items such as ɲàm 'meat' (5a), əsáŋ 'corn' (5b) and others listed in table (3) above. This is due to their relatively hard texture even when these items are cooked or fried.  The semantic distinction between ʒɨ́ 'eat' and pfɨ́ʔ 'eat by chewing' can express the difference in the texture of the consumed object, i.e. whether the object is raw or cooked. This is seen when pfɨ́ʔ 'eat by chewing' rather than ʒɨ́ 'eat' is used to describe the eating of food items when they are not properly cooked, or are eaten raw or unripe, e.g. kəlāŋ kə́ məŋkálə̀ 'cocoyam', kəlāŋ kə́ káká 'taro', ndɔŋ ə̀ məŋkálə̀ 'potato', ndɔŋ ə́ lyɨ̀mə́ 'sweet potato', kàsâ 'cassava', kəʒʉʔ 'yam sp.', əlɛḿ 'yam sp.', mbàsə̀ 'vegetable', ŋgwǒbàŋ 'guava' and əŋgɔm 'banana, plantain'. Thus, the selection of the verb pfɨ́ʔ 'eat by chewing' in (6) rather than ʒɨ́ 'eat' as in (4) indicates that the consumed items, i.e. beans (6a) and sweet potato, are not properly cooked or even raw 14 rather than well cooked as entailed when used in collocation with ʒɨ́ 'eat' in (4). In other cases the manner of eating certain objects can be expressed only by a single verb. For example, the way kəbáyn 'fufu' is eaten can only be encoded by ʒɨ́ 'eat' because there is only one way to prepare it, that is, the corn flour must be cooked thoroughly to produce a paste that is made into loaves and then eaten with a vegetable or soup. The way of eating ɲàm 'meat', ʃʉ̀ 'fish', bəľəŋ 'peanuts', əsáŋ 'corn', fəŋgwòlə̀ 'mango', kəǹsánsáŋ 'pineapple/sugarcane' can only be described by pfɨ́ʔ 'eat by chewing' since they do not become completely soft even after cooking (where applicable) and still require some effort to masticate. If peanuts are ground to make mbúʔ 'peanut pudding' then the verb ʒɨ́ 'eat' is used.
The manner of consuming food items that are liquid or soft is encoded by ló 'eat by licking (using tongue)', as illustrated in (7). Some fruits such as lâmsə̀ 'orange', kəmbámbáyn 'passion fruit', kəǹwìʔtə̀ 'black nightshade', àdzɔŋ 'plum (dacryodes edulis)', əbyɨ́ 'shell butter nuts', and byə̂ 'avocado' become soft or contain a high amount of juice when ripe, which justifies the conceptualisation of their consumption as eating by licking. This is also true of various kinds of vegetables such as kəʒɨ́ŋ 'bitterleaf (vernonia amygdalina)', təẁás 'peas', ŋgwɔlɔʔ 'okra', kəvúʔ 'mushroom', fəsɛś 'pepper', fəɲɔʔ 'garden egg, tomato', áɲɔs 'onion', and gálìk 'garlic' which become soft when cooked. Other items actually come in liquid form, e.g. mbàsə̀ 'soup', məǹʃíʔ 'oil', and əlyʉ̀ 'honey', but are not consumed by drinking, but rather in small quantities, i.e. by licking or by sips. Fəmbváŋ 'salt' comes in granular form, but can be consumed by licking in small quantities by dissolving either in liquid food or by saliva, just like mbɔŋmbɔŋ 'bonbon'.  Apart from objects that are mostly liquid, i.e. lâmsə̀ 'orange', əlyʉ̀ 'honey', mbàsə̀ 'soup', məǹʃíʔ 'oil', the rest of the objects in this category, e.g. byə̂ 'avocado' (7a) and fəsɛś 'pepper' (7b) can also be chewed when not well-cooked, not properly ripe or even raw, as illustrated in (8a-b). The verb ló 'eat by licking' can also be used if someone eats any type of food, e.g. 'fufu' extremely fast (9a). The other verb that also refers to the act of licking, i.e. lɨ́ŋ 'lick (using fingers)' describes the act of cleaning up a plate with fingers and licking them (9b). It is also used if someone finishes up the soup or vegetable before the carbohydrate, which could be 'cocoyam' or 'fufu' (9c), an act which is reprehensible and blameworthy.  The verb bwólə́ 'eat noisily, crunch' encodes the manner in which objects that have a hard texture are eaten, e.g. əsáŋ 'corn', fəŋgwòlə̀ 'mango', ŋgwǒbàŋ 'guava', əbí 'kolanut', ndɔŋ ə́ lyɨ̀mə́ 'sweet potato', and mbɔŋmbɔŋ 'bonbon'. Apart from 'kolanut' and 'bonbon', the rest of the items listed above can be eaten noisily only under certain As seen in table (3) above, corn, mango, guava, kolanut, and sweet potato primarily collocate with the verb pfɨ́ʔ 'eat by chewing'. The application of bwólə́ 'eat noisily, crunch' instead of pfɨ́ʔ 'eat by chewing' in (10b) and (11c) highlights an unusually hard texture and an extraordinary amount of noise that accompanies the consumption, due to the hard texture of the object.
The verb mì 'swallow' describes possible ways of eating and drinking, since it can refer to the eating of food without chewing properly (12a), or eating rapidly without taking time to masticate (12b). The verb mì can also be used when someone keeps water in their mouth for a while before swallowing (12c). 15 15 Keeping the water in the mouth for a while is a necessary precondition since ɲʉ́ 'drink' is used for gulping down water or any other liquid immediately. The verb is also used to reprimand a greedy person who wishes to eat more food than is available. In this case, the person expected to provide the food can give ironic encouragement to the greedy person to swallow any object (13).
The verb ʃwɔŋ 'suck' is used to talk about the consumption of food items like fruits that are liquid in nature when properly ripe, e.g. fəŋgwòlə̀ 'mango' or items that need sucking in the mouth before swallowing, e.g. mbɔŋmbɔŋ 'bonbon', as in (14a-b). it, then only ʃwɔŋ 'suck' is used. As will be seen below, to break off a little piece of an unripe mango with the teeth before chewing is denoted with the verb lɨ́m 'bite'. Mbɔŋmbɔŋ 'bonbon' collocates with ló 'eat by licking' whereas fəŋgwòlə̀ 'mango' does not since ló 'eat by licking' usually applies to items which can be dissolved by saliva.
Regarding other kinds of fruits such as lâmsə̀ 'orange', kəmbámbáyn 'passion fruit', and kəǹwìʔtə̀ 'black nightshade' it is not clear what kind of contrast ensures that only ló 'eat by licking', not ʃwɔŋ 'eat by sucking' is applicable with them. The act of sucking does not only apply to human agents but to non-human animates such as fəmbúm 'mosquito' (16a) and kəkúf 'tick' (16b) as well.
(15) a. fə-mbúm fə́ yì ʃwɔŋ Búŋ ɣə̀ ə́ 19-mosquito DJ P1 suck Bung 3SG DJ ŋ-kwáʔá N-be(come)_ill 'A mosquito sucked Bung ('s blood) and he fell ill.' b. kə-kúf kə́ ʃwɔŋ lí mə-nlyúŋ fá ə-wèn ə̀ 7-tick DJ suck P0 6a-blood PREP 5-body 5.AM ɲàm 9.animal 'A tick has sucked the animal's blood.' This meaning can be construed as an extension from the meaning of a person consuming something. Stinging and biting by insects are as concrete as humans biting food (Newman & Aberra 2009), implying that this meaning is not particularly figurative. In this regard, it it important to note that the eat verbs listed above can have nonhuman animate agents, e.g. ʒɨ́ 'eat' is used when dogs, cats, or pigs eat solid food such as kəbáyn 'fufu'; pfíʔ 'eat by chewing' describes how cattle and goats eat grass or how dogs and cats eat meat; and ló 'eat by licking' is used when dogs and cats eat liquid food.
The verb lɨ́m 'bite' is used when a hard object needs to be broken down into little pieces before chewing, as in the case of mango (16a) and meat (16b). Objects in this category also include fəɲɔʔ 'garden egg', kəlāŋ kə́ məŋkálə̀ 'cocoyam', kəlāŋ kə́ káká 'taro', ndɔŋ ə̀ məŋkálə̀ 'potato', ndɔŋ ə́ lyɨ̀mə́ 'sweet potato', kàsâ 'cassava', əbúʔ 'pumpkin', kəʒʉʔ 'yam sp.', əlɛḿ 'yam sp.', əŋgɔm 'banana, plantain', ʃʉ̀ 'fish', əsáŋ As with sucking, the act of biting does not only apply to human agents but to non-human animates, e.g. fəmbúm 'mosquito' (17a) and kəkúf 'tick' (17b), as well. (17)  Drinking involves the movement of liquid through the mouth and down the throat facilitated by the tongue and the palate. The verb ɲʉ́ 'drink' describes the process of drinking múú 'water', məǹlyʉʔ 'wine (i.e. palm wine, soft and alcoholic drinks)', and ŋkáŋ 'cornbeer', as in (18) The semantic distinctions in Babanki consumption verbs hinge primarily on the texture of the object which, in turn, determines the manner of consumption. In other words, the choice of verb depends primarily on the texture of the object consumed, but gives information about the manner of consumption, since one determines the other.

Semantic extensions of ʒɨ́ 'eat' and ɲʉ́ 'drink'
Babanki verbs for eat and drink are rich sources of figurative extensions just as they are in other African languages such as Akan (Agyepong, Amfo & Osam 2017), Amharic (Newman & Aberra 2009), Ewe and Gurene (Adjei & Atintono 2009), Hausa (Williams 1991, Jaggar & Buba 2009, and Swahili (Sheikh & Wolff 1981) and non-African languages such as Korean (Song 2009), Mandarin and Shanghainese (Ye 2010). The verbs for eat and drink are the lexical items in the domain of consumption of solid vs. liquid food which have the most generic meanings in Babanki, as systematically expanded and illustrated according to extensions that radiate from eat (3.1) and those from drink (3.2).

Semantic extensions of eat
In general, semantic extensions that radiate from eat are based on the process of getting food into the mouth and eventually swallowing it. They reflect the tendency for the internalisation of food to provide the agent with certain sensory experiences such as taste, satisfaction, pleasure or displeasure (Newman 2009). As for Babanki, all semantic extensions of the generic verb ʒɨ́ 'eat' build on two closely related overarching structural metaphors, i.e. appropriation of resources is eating (3.1.1) and winning is eating (3.1.2), and a metonymical extension that links mutual agreement with commenusality (3.1.3). 17 The first metaphor construes the internalisation A&Ü | 94 / 2021 Akumbu & Kießling | Babanki eat and drink verbs of non-food items such as material possessions as ingestion of food, which in itself is based on another structural metaphor resources are food. The second metaphor casts the acquisition of immaterial advantage gained in a competition in the mould of eating. The metaphor appropriation of resources is eating has two major entailments which derive from correspondences between source and target concepts on the level of individual aspects and sub-components. Thus, the insertion of food into the mouth as the initial phase in the act of eating simply corresponds to the appropriation of possessions itself. The act of swallowing corresponds to the eventual spending of the resources as enabled by appropriation. The act of spending typically entails two further effects, i.e. pleasure on the consumer's side which corresponds to the derivation of positive feelings from the pleasant taste of food and the sensation of satiation in the course of eating (3.1.1.1) and reduction and depletion on the side of the consumed item which corresponds to the decrease of available food in the course of the meal (3.1.1.2).
In contrast to appropriation of resources is eating (3.1.1), the structural metaphor winning is eating (3.1.2) rather highlights two additional aspects, i.e. the benefit gained does not reside in the appropriation of some material possession, but rather in some advantage gained in the course of a competition and at the expense of some other participant. In addition, the metaphor winning is eating is also linked to the first metaphor appropriation of resources is eating by virtue of the negative effect of deprivation which the appropriation inevitably has on the prior owner of the resource in question. Such negative corollaries of autobeneficiary effects will be referred to as altrimaleficiary in the following.
The semantic extension achieving mutual agreement is eating together (3.1.3) is motivated by the cultural practice of sealing an agreement with the shared consumption of kolanuts.

Appropriation of resources
Taking over possession of something is often conceptualised via the structural metaphor appropriation of resources is eating, which is based on yet another metaphor, namely, resources are food. The applicability of both metaphors is motivated by the positive sensory experiences that are linked to the internalisation of food items being mapped onto the pleasant feelings that an individual  (19a-c) and in specific cases such as collecting a bribe (19e). While the case of inheritance (19d) may predominatly involve negative feelings such as sadness about the loss of the deceased person, the inheritor may still be seen to gain a certain amount of satisfaction from inheriting the deceased person's property. Beside mere appropriation, the metaphor also includes the notion of profit or benefit on the side of the agent and detriment to the former owner or some third participant.
In contrast to ordinary expressions of possession and appropriation via verbs such as zɛń 'buy' in (20) and lyɨ̀ 'take', bɔŋ 'pick' and kíʔí 'have' (28), the expressions based on the metaphor appropriation of resources is eating include an additional notion of irretrievability, i.e. the items consumed in (19) 18 We owe this observation to one of the anonymous reviewers to whom we are grateful. 19 The term njangi is commonly used in Cameroon to refer a group of individuals who meet on a regular basis to contribute money and give it to one or more members at a time. During subsequent meetings previous benefactors refund the exact amount the current beneficiary had contributed and those who are still to benefit contribute an amount equal to or greater than an agreed minimum. Whatever they contribute will eventually by refunded to them when their turn to benefit comes. The structural metaphor appropriation of resources is eating has the following entailments: (a) the agent acquires some material item or gain, (b) the agent derives a positive effect from taking over ownership of the item or gain (profit or benefit), (c) the agent's ownership of the item or gain is to the detriment of the prior owner (19a, c, e) or a third party, i.e. the other njangi candidates (19b) and other potential inheritors who go away empty-handed (19d). The agent willfully takes over possession of items, preventing some other participant(s) from doing so. In (19a, e), the victims are deprived of their items such that they actually lose it against their will. Elsewhere, the agent's new possession may be endorsed or approved by others. In (19b) in particular, the choice of the beneficiary is always a consensus between the njangi members, whereas in (19c) only the owner of a beehive has the right to collect honey from it, and in (19d) inheriting property is usually based on the deceased person's will. 21 In all the cases in (19), the agent enjoys and gains satisfaction from appropriating a resource. The metaphor, therefore, includes the notion of profit or benefit on the side of the agent, showing that it is not simply a transfer of possession, but rather that the agent is actively involved in controlling the transfer. Even in the case of inheritance, which is patrilineal in Babanki, the agent is not passive as he has to prepare for and undergo the rituals involved. Implicit in the metaphor is the understanding that the material item or gain is not only appropriated by the agent, but it diminishes or vanishes from the perspec-20 There is no negative connotation here at all, although the one who inherits would not say he has "eaten" his father's property but would simply say he is the successor. 21 Inheritance which is not in the deceased person's will is said to have been taken forcefully, as expressed in the following example.
Búŋ When money is spent, two different situations can license the use of the eat metaphor. The first is illegitimate acquisition, i.e. the process of acquiring the money spent is inappropriate, e.g. using someone else's money without their consent or in a way the owner disapproves of (22a), and the second is when the acquisition is legitimate but the money is misused or squandered, e.g. spending children's school fees on alcohol or women (22b).  (19) are in order here. The meaning of (19a) includes the lack of consent on the side of the prior owner of the possession. Transfer verbs such as lyɨ̀ 'take' (23a) and ʃí 'receive' (23b) would be used if the object(s) were willingly offered to or properly obtained by the agent. The situation in (19c) can be compared with the meaning of consuming honey which is expressed by the verb ló 'eat by licking' (24).
(24) Búŋ ə́ ló-ó ə-lyʉB ung DJ lick-PROG 3-honey 'Bung is eating honey.' Therefore, "eating" honey refers to "collecting" and ʒɨ́ 'eat' is not applicable for its actual consumption, due to the nature of the substance, but rather ló 'eat by licking' is applied, as laid out in the section on the semantic field of ingestion of food in section two and illustrated in (25) where the two activities of collecting and eating honey are done consecutively in that order. The eat metaphor for taking a bribe (19e) is widespread in Cameroon and Nigeria, as can be seen from its occurrence in Cameroonian Pidgin English (CPE), Cameroonian French (Meutem Kamtchueng 2015), and Nigerian Pidgin (Naija). In CPE, for example, it is common to hear the expression in (26) uttered by a service provider who intends to make the beneficiary understand that they have to give a bribe for the service provided.
(26) na thank you I di chop COP thank 2SG 1SG AUX eat 'Do I eat appreciation?' P-Square's big music hit of 2011 "Chop my money" illustrates the use of this metaphor in Naija. 22 The eat metaphor for taking a bribe is prevalent in those African societies where bribing is conceptualised as feeding or as a (food-)gift, as pointed out by Polzenhagen & Wolf (2007).
The solid nature of the consumed item is crucial in the conceptual transfer of the structural metaphor appropriation of possession is eating, since in none of the expressions in (19)  While the agent acquires possession of the items in (28) and may derive profit or benefit from them, there is no indication that they consume the items nor that they acquire the items to the detriment of some other participant(s). In (28a), for example, the agent might have simply taken the bag to hand it over to the owner, just as in (28b) where the agent may also hand over the money to the owner. In (28c) the agent has become rich probably by working hard without preventing others from doing the same. This contrasts with the specific meaning of acquisition of property for one's own benefit and consumption to the exclusion and detriment of other participants obtainable by replacing the central verbs in (28a-c) by ʒɨ́ 'eat', as in (29) Enjoying resources Metaphorical entailments under this subgroup are based exclusively on eat and express pleasurable emotional states agents derive from spending a resource such as əɣɔʔ 'wealth' in (31a). Since we prefer food which procudes an agreeable taste and avoid food which is not pleasant to taste, "there is an experiental bias towards enjoyable gustation" (Song 2009: 201). This bias actually motivates the metaphor enjoying resources is eating as an entailment of the structural metaphor appropriation of resources is eating. Example (31a) reflects the linkage of the metaphor enjoying resources is eating to the metaphor appropriation of resources is eating, since the wealth Bung enjoys is something he must have acquired by prior transfer, either by personal achievement or by inheritance. By contrast, show that the metaphor enjoying resources is eating also works independently, since in those instances the pleasure is derived from a resource for which prior appropriation is hard to conceive. The situation in (31b) can be interpreted as enjoying oneself by drawing on one's own body as a resource in all types of physical activities which create pleasure. In (31c) eating the world is equated to enjoying life by drawing on resources available to anyone who is capable of taking them for themselves. Depleting resources A crucial entailment of the structural metaphor appropriation of resources is eating is depletion, i.e. the resource is diminished markedly in quantity, content, or value after appropriation as the new owner starts spending it. In other words, the resulting metaphor depletion of resources is eating is linked to the basic metaphor appropriation of resources is eating via an intermediate metonymical step, i.e. spending of resources is eating. This entailment is motivated by the effect of eating on the patient, i.e. food that is consumed. As the consumer takes food into their mouth and breaks it down into digestible particles, the transformation is considered to be depletive, i.e. time and resources referred to are not simply spent, but rather used up to an extent which is commonly felt to go beyond the prototypical limit, as illustrated in (33) The examples in (33) illustrate how certain resources, i.e. əʒʉ́ 'time' (a), kətsɔʔ 'bricks' (b), ndʒísə́ 'fabric' (c), kəʃí 'space' (d), and əkó 'money' (e) are depleted. In each case a greater amount of the resource is used whereas the desire is that a lesser quantity should have been sufficient. In (a), the job takes up too much time, just like the building that requires more bricks for its construction (b), the dress that takes up more fabric (c), the tree that takes up more space than is desired (d), and the human agent who uses up money in a way that is not expected (e).
Although the agent derives pleasure from using someone else's money in (33e), the metaphor's entailment is categorised as depletion rather than pleasure from the perspective of the speaker who regrets and disapproves of the action, as discussed above in (3.1.1.1). The speaker regrets that the agent has used up the money either without authorisation or in a way that was not expected.
That depletion entailments are limited to eat is confirmed by the fact that any attempt to replace the verb 'eat' in (33) with 'drink' produces only ungrammatical constructions, as illustrated in (34).
(34) a. *ə-ʃēʔ yɛń ə́ ɲʉ-ʉ́ ə-ʒʉ́ 5-work DEM DJ drink-PROG 5-time 'This job is *drinking time.' b. *ə-ŋgəŋ yɛń ə́ ɲʉ́ lí kə-tsɔʔ 5-house DEM DJ drink P0 7-brick 'This house has *drunk too many bricks.' Babanki extensions categorised under "depletion" are classified as "destruction" extensions in a number of languages, e.g. Akan (Agyepong, Amfo & Osam 2017), Amharic (Newman & Aberra 2009), Korean (Song 2009 to the patient, i.e., food, when taken whole or piecemeal into the mouth, crushed and chewed (i.e., masticated) by means of the teeth, tongue and palate and then swallowed. The reduction of food into small particles is considered to be "destruction", and the metaphorical extensions are based on the destruction or transformation of the patient. In Babanki, however, the patient is not really "destroyed" and the target meaning is rather something like "use up beyond a prototypical limit", and is better described as "depletion".

Winning
Immaterial gains are conceptualised as eating, motivated by the structural metaphor winning is eating. In contrast to the metaphor appropriation of resources is eating, the benefit gained does not reside in the acquisition of some material possession, but rather in some advantage gained in the course of a competition and at the expense of some other participant. Both metaphors are also linked by virtue of the altrimaleficiary effect of deprivation which the appropriation inevitably has on the prior owner, just as the triumph of winning has for the loser. The applicability of this metaphor is motivated by the positive sensory experiences that are linked to the internalisation of food items being mapped onto the pleasant feelings that an individual experiences as a result of winning, as in the following examples. The optional mention of the opponents in (35a-d) suggests that either the "competition", i.e. kəɲɨ́ŋ 'race', bɔ̄ 'football game', ntáŋ 'quarrel', or the nsɔʔ 'court case', or the opponent in the competition could be conceptualised as the patient and appear as direct object of ʒɨ́ 'eat'. The following entailments are included in this structural metaphor winning is eating: (a) the agent acquires some immaterial gain, which (b) secures him or her an advantage (profit, gain, or benefit), (c) the agent derives a positive effect from winning, (d) the agent's winning is to the detriment of some other participant.

Mutual agreement
Agreement between individuals or groups of people is lexicalised in the verb stem ʒɨ́mə́ 'agree with each other' (used only with plural subjects), as exemplified in (36) below. The verb stem ʒɨ́mə́ is derived from the root ʒɨ́ 'eat' by the associative extension -mə (Hyman 2018: 182) which expresses a social stem, i.e. the notion of cooperation of two or more participants. The semantic link which connects the source meaning 'eat' and the derived meaning 'agree' resides in the conventional practice of sealing an official agreement by both parties breaking and eating kolanuts together. The semantic transfer which derives the notion of mutual agreement from the notion of eating thus seems to be metonymical in nature in that shared consumption of kolanuts is taken to refer to the agreement that it seals. 23 23 In addition, one might also argue that the metonymy achieving mutual agreement is eating together also supports and strengthens the structural metaphor appropriation of resources is eating, due to their convergence in the concept of pleasure. The mutual agreement achieved between two parties is a source of pleasure in that both gain mutual benefit from each other which is equal to the pleasure gained in a shared meal. And this corresponds to the pleasure a new owner The associative verb ʒɨ́mə́ is specialised for the derived meaning 'agree with each other'. The original meaning of its source ʒɨ́ 'eat' is no longer available in ʒɨ́mə. In order to express the sharing of a meal one has to resort to periphrastic means, e.g. with the adverbial ámúʔú 'together' (37).

Semantic extensions of drink
Semantic extensions that radiate from drink are based on two structural metaphors, namely, absorption is drinking and inhalation is drinking. The two stages of getting drinks into the mouth and eventually swallowing which are included in the meaning of the source verb ɲʉ́ 'drink' motivate its metaphorical extension to express absorption and inhalation. The metaphor absorption is drinking (3.2.1) is based on the construal of the inanimate locus of absorption as personified agent of a drinking action while the metaphor inhalation is drinking (3.2.2) is based on the extension of eligible patients from liquids to aeriform or gaseous materials. may derive from appropriating and spending a new resource as entailment from the metaphor appropriation of resources is eating.

Absorption
In the process of absorption, a liquid substance such as məǹʒíʔ 'oil' (38a-b) or múú 'water' (38c-e) penetrates a locus, i.e. infiltrates some porous or permeable material such as əŋgɔm 'plantain' (38a), pwɔfpwɔf 'puff puff' (CPE) (38b) 24 , nsé 'soil' (38c), kəbáyn 'fufu' (38d) and ndʒísə́ 'dress' (38e) up to the point of soaking or satiating it. This process is conceptualised via the metaphor absorption is drinking in Babanki. The semantic transfer underlying this metaphor resides in the construal of the locus of absorption as a metaphorical agent which actively initiates and willingly controls the process of taking in a liquid. At the same time, the theme role in the intrusion process is construed as a patient which undergoes reduction. Puff puff is the Cameroonian Pidgin English name of a popular West African fluffy and slightly crunchy doughnut made by deep frying dough in oil. 25 The noun class marker appears as a suffix since the noun ndʒí-sə́ 'dress' is from class 10 which is marked by the -sə́ suffix in Babanki as opposed to the rest of the classes which are marked by prefixes. The construal of the liquid as patient in a metaphorical drinking process entails the notion of its depletion, i.e. as more liquid comes to be soaked in, the amount remaining outside decreases markedly in quantity. In (38a-b), the quantity of oil that would have been used to fry more plantains, puff puff or other items is depleted by the item fried and in (38c-e) the water is soaked up by the item involved requiring more water to be supplied. Absorption metaphors in other languages, e.g. Amharic (Newman & Aberra 2009) are mapped from the positive benefits derived from drinking to the effect the absorbed liquids have on the receiving objects. As in Akan (Agyepong, Amfo & Osam 2017), what is evident in Babanki is "internalisation" rather than "entity benefit" since not all absorption/internalisation of liquids is beneficial to the consumer. As is well known, some liquids may provide the consumer with the desired positive sensory feeling, but may not be beneficial. The focus, therefore, is on the absorption, not the benefits.
Absorption metaphors are restricted to drink and using eat leads to the collapse of the metaphor, as exemplified in (39)

Inhalation
The extensions in this subgroup are restricted to drink and describe the smooth, continuous, unimpeded intake of stimulants through the nasal-oral tract. As noted by Song (2009: 205) "gas and gas-like substances are akin to liquid in that they have a volume but no (definite) shape. They can also be inhaled through the nose -or the mouth if required -without interruptions, just as liquid is taken through the mouth into the stomach and intestines with virtually no interruption". It is this smooth, continuous, uninterrupted intake that motivates the metaphorical extensions. The inhaling or smoking interpretation is obtained by collocating ɲʉ́ 'drink' with kəbhìʔ 'dust' (40a) or ndɔbɔʔ  (Noonan 1992), Puluwat (Elbert 1972). An attempt to use eat in these extensions makes the metaphors collapse since the metaphors of inhaling or smoking are restricted to drink, as illustrated in (41).

Summary
The generic consumption verbs ʒɨ́ 'eat' and ɲʉ́ 'drink' undergo various semantic extensions in Babanki, both metaphorical and metonymical. The proliferation of figurative meanings is more common with eat than with drink, as recurrently observed crosslinguistically, e.g. for Amharic (Newman & Aberra 2009), Akan (Agyepong, Amfo & Osam 2017), and Korean (Song 2009). Semantic extensions of ʒɨ́ 'eat' are based on two closely related overarching structural metaphors, i.e. appropriation of resources is eating and winning is eating. The first metaphor construes the internalisation of non-food items such as material possessions as ingestion of food, and is thus based on another metaphor resources are food. The second metaphor casts the acquisition of immaterial advantage gained in a competition in the mould of eating. Further entailments of these metaphors have been traced along three separate lines of extension in a stepby-step fashion leading up to the target concepts, i.e. the altrimalefi-ciary effects of appropriation of resources, the pleasure of enjoying resources and the depletion of resources, as visualised below in table (42). The conceptualisation of achieving mutual agreement by eating together must be treated separately on both formal and semantic grounds. First, it is not directly based on the verb ʒɨ́ 'eat', but rather on its social verb stem ʒɨ́mə. Second, the semantic transfer involved is not metaphorical in nature, but rather metonymical in that the notion of mutual agreement is derived from the conventional practice of sealing official agreements by breaking and eating kolanuts together.
Semantic extensions that radiate from ɲʉ́ 'drink' are accounted for in two structural metaphors: inhalation is drinking and absorption is drinking. While the first metaphor is simply based on the extension of eligible patients from liquids to aeriform or gaseous materials, the second metaphor is rather based on the construal of the inanimate locus of absorption as personified agent of a drinking action.
(42) Babanki semantic extensions of eat and drink

Basic concept
Steps of extension eat > appropriate resources (non-food items) > consume / enjoy resources irretrievably > deprive another party from resources > derive an autobeneficiary effect from consumption > gain possession of resources (non-food items) > use of resources beyond prototypical limit > deprive another party from resources > reductory effect on resources > depletion > win competition (immaterial gain) > derive an autobeneficiary effect from winning > detrimental effect for loser eat together > achieve mutual agreement drink > soaking in of liquid into porous material > porose material ingests liquid > absorb (inanimate "agent") > reductory effect on liquid > ingestion of aeriform or gaseous materials > inhale The entailments of the two basic metaphors derived from eat in table (42) above, i.e. appropriation of resources is eating and winning is eating, can be unified in a single semantic network in (43 which exposes two crucial dimensions of the conceptual extensions branching off from the source concept eat. First, it allows for an easy identification of areas of overlap in the metaphors' entailments. Thus, the altrimaleficiary effect can be seen to result from both metaphors, i.e. it follows as the defeat of the loser in a competition from the fact that the winner takes the gain, according to the metaphor winning is eating; and at the same time it also follows as the deprivation of prior owners or competitors, according to the metaphor appropriation of resources is eating. The pleasure effect results from the enjoyable taste of food and the feeling of satiation on the side of the consumer under the appropriation metaphor, while it also results as the winner's triumph from the winning metaphor. (43) Unified model of semantic extensions of eat The second dimension the network aims to reveal is the matching of individual entailments with individual aspects of the source concept eat, as explicitly detailed in the bracketed expressions. Thus, the appropriation of non-food resources and the immaterial gain acquired by winning a competition correspond to the intake of food in the mouth under the source concept. Spending the resources is paralleled by the act of swallowing the food. The pleasure the new proprietor derives from spending the resources as well as the triumph the winner experiences when winning the competition can be equated with the positive sensory experiences derived from the pleasant taste of food and the feeling of satiation on the side of the consumer. The detrimental effect on the side of the loser as well as the prior owner or competitor corresponds to their deprivation and loss of access to food. Finally, the depletion of the resource corresponds to the decrease of the food during the meal resulting from its destruction by the process of mastication and swallowing. Crosslinguistically, metaphorical extensions of either eat or drink may both present pleasant and unpleasant sensory experiences, e.g. extensions from shaa 'drink' in Hausa (Jaggar & Buba 2009). Although the verbs for eat and drink express universal activities, since everyone eats and drinks, the activities are conceptualized differently in different cultures. As pointed out by Adjei & Atintono (2009: 192) "there will be variations in the extent to which people from different cultural settings profile the interpretations of the metaphorical expressions. There is a strong relationship between a people's conceptual, environmental and cultural experiences and their linguistic systems which is shared across cultures". This accounts for the remarkable absence in Babanki of some metaphorical extensions of eat and drink attested in other languages, e.g. extensions of eat for sexual intercourse, as in Akan (Agyepong, Amfo & Osam 2017), Hausa (Newman 2009, Jaggar & Buba 2009), Zulu (Newman 2009), Swahili (Sheikh & Wolff 1981) and Camfranglais (Stein 2021: 172), for kill something / someone in Amharic (Newman & Aberra 2009), Akan (Agyepong, Amfo & Osam 2017), Hausa (Jaggar & Buba 2009), Ewe and Dagaare (Adjei & Atintono 2009), and the extensions of drink for undergoing trouble and enduring painful experiences, as in Hausa (Jaggar & Buba 2009). On the other hand, the fact that eat (and drink) activities are conceptualized differently in different cultures accounts for the presence in Babanki of the metonymy