DOCSLIB.ORG

Appendix A: Primary Language Code List

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Appendix A: Primary Language Code List APPENDIX A: PRIMARY LANGUAGE CODE LIST INDO-EUROPEAN (601-678) 642 Czech 643 Kashubian English-based Pidgin Creoles (601-606) 644 Lusatian 601 Jamaican Creole 645 Polish 602 Krio 646 Slovak 603 Hawaiian Pidgin 647 Bulgarian 604 Pidgin 648 Macedonian 605 Gullah 649 Serbocroatian 606 Saramacca 650 Croatian 651 Serbian 652 Slovene Germanic languages (607-618) 607 German 608 Pennsylvania Dutch Baltic languages (653-654) 609 Yiddish 653 Lithuanian 610 Dutch 654 Lettish 611 Afrikaans 612 Frisian 655 Armenian 613 Luxembourgian Iranian languages (656-661) Scandinavian (614-618) 656 Persian 614 Swedish 657 Pashto 615 Danish 658 Kurdish 616 Norwegian 659 Balochi 617 Icelandic 660 Tadzhik 618 Faroese 661 Ossete Romance languages (619-632) Indic languages (662-678) 619 Italian 662 India n.e.c. 663 Hindi French and French Creoles (620-624) 664 Bengali 620 French 665 Panjabi 621 Provencal 666 Marathi 622 Patois 667 Gujarathi 623 French Creole 668 Bihari 624 Cajun 669 Rajasthani 670 Oriya Spanish and Spanish Creoles (625, 627, 628) 671 Urdu 625 Spanish 672 Assamese 626 Catalonian 673 Kashmiri 627 Ladino 674 Nepali 628 Pachuco 675 Sindhi 676 Pakistan n.e.c. Portuguese and Portuguese Creoles (629-630) 677 Sinhalese 629 Portuguese 678 Romany 630 Papia Mentae 679 Finnish (OTHER) 631 Romanian 680 Estonian (OTHER) 632 Rhaeto-romanic 681 Lapp (OTHER) 682 Hungarian (OTHER) Celtic languages (633-636) 683 Other Uralic Lang. (OTHER) 633 Welsh 634 Breton ASIAN AND PACIFIC ISLAND LANGUAGES 635 Irish Gaelic (684-695, 698-771) 636 Scottic Gaelic Asian languages (684-695, 698-729) 637 Greek 638 Albanian Turkic languages (684-693) 684 Chuvash Slavic languages (638-652) 685 Karakalpak 639 Russian 686 Kazakh 640 Bielorussian 687 Kirghiz 641 Ukrainian 688 Karachay A-1 689 Uighur Northwest Austronesian (742-749, 752, 759) 690 Azerabaijani 691 Turkish Philippines (742-749) 692 Turkmen 742 Tagalog 693 Yakut 743 Bisayan 694 Mongolian 744 Sebuano 695 Tungus 745 Pangasinan 696 Caucasian (OTHER) 746 Ilocano 697 Basque (OTHER) 747 Bikol 748 Pampangan Dravidian languages (698-705) 749 Gorontalo 698 Dravidian 699 Brahui Micronesian languages (750-751, 753-758, 760-764) 700 Gondi 750 Micronesian 701 Telugu 751 Carolinian 702 Kannada 752 Chamorro (NW Austronesian) 703 Malayalam 753 Gilbertese 704 Tamil 754 Kusaiean 705 Kurukh 755 Marshallese 706 Munda 756 Mokilese 707 Burushaski 757 Mortlockese 758 Nauruan Chinese languages (708-715) 759 Palau (NW Austronesian) 708 Chinese 760 Ponapean 709 Hakka 761 Trukese 710 Kan, Hsiang 762 Ulithean 711 Cantonese 763 Woleai-ulithi 712 Mandarin 764 Yapese 713 Fuchow 714 Formosan 765 Melanesian (also Iindo-Pacific, n.e.c.) 715 Wu Polynesian languages (766-770, 772-776) Tibeto-Burman (716-719) 766 Polynesian 716 Tibetan 767 Samoan 717 Burmese 768 Tongan 718 Karen 769 Niuean 719 Kachin 770 Tokelauan 720 Thai 721 Miao-yao, Mien 771 Fijian 722 Miao, Hmong 723 Japanese 772 Marquesan 724 Korean 773 Rarotongan 725 Laotian 774 Maori 726 Mon-Khmer, Cambodian 775 Nukuoro 727 Paleo-siberian (also Siberian languages n.e.c) 776 Hawaiian 728 Vietnamese 729 Muong OTHER LANGUAGES (679-683, 696-697, 777-999) Pacific Islands languages (730-776) Semitic languages (777--780) 730 Buginese 777 Arabic 731 Moluccan 778 Hebrew 779 Syriac West Indonesian (732-741) 780 Amharic 732 Indonesian 733 Achinese Afro-Asiatic languages (781-783) 734 Balinese 781 Berber 735 Cham 782 Chadic 736 Javanese 783 Cushite 737 Madurese 738 Malagasy 739 Malay Nilo-Saharan languages (784-789) 740 Minangkabau 784 Sudanic 741 Sundanese 785 Nilotic 786 Nilo-hamitic 787 Nubian 788 Saharan 789 Nilo-sharan 790 Khoisan A-2 Niger-Congo Languages (791-798) Athapascan-Eyak languages (847-862, 864-865, 977-980) 791 Swahili 847 Athapascan 792 Bantu 848 Ahtena 793 Mande 849 Han 794 Fulani 850 Ingalit 795 Gur 851 Koyukon 796 Kru, Ibo, Yoruba 852 Kuchin 797 Efik 853 Upper Kuskokwim 798 Mbum (and Related) 854 Tanaina 799 African (not further specified) 855 Tanana 856 Tanacross Native North American languages (800-955, 959-966, 977-982) 857 Upper Tanana 858 Tutchone Eskimo-Aleut languages (800-805) 859 Chasta Costa 800 Aleut 860 Hupa 801 Pacific Gulf Yupik 861 Other Athapascan-eyak 802 Eskimo 862 Apache 803 Inupik 863 Kiowa (Tanoan) 804 St Lawrence Is Yupik 864 Navaho 805 Yupik 865 Eyak 866 Tlingit Algonquian languages (806-827) 806 Algonquian Penutian languages (867-884, 964-965, 969) 807 Arapaho 867 Mountain Maidu 808 Atsina 868 Northwest Maidu 809 Blackfoot 869 Southern Maidu 810 Cheyenne 870 Coast Miwok 811 Cree 871 Plains Miwok 812 Delaware 872 Sierra Miwok 813 Fox 873 Nomlaki 814 Kickapoo 874 Patwin 815 Menomini 875 Wintun 816 French Cree 876 Foothill No. Yokuts 817 Miami 877 Tachi 818 Micmac 878 Santiam 819 Ojibwa 879 Siuslaw 820 Ottawa 880 Klamath 821 Passamaquoddy 881 Nez Perce 822 Penobscot 882 Sahaptian 823 Abnaki 883 Upper Chinook 824 Potawatomi 884 Tsimshian 825 Shawnee 826 Wiyot Hokan languages (885-901) 827 Yurok 885 Achumawi 886 Atsugewi 828 Kutenai 887 Karok 888 Pomo Wakashan languages (829-832) 889 Shastan 829 Makah 890 Washo 830 Kwakiutl 891 up River Yuman 831-832 Nootka 892 Cocomaricopa 893 Mohave Salish languages (833-845, 981-982) 894 Yuma 833 Lower Chehalis 895 Diegueno 834 Upper Chehalis 896 Delta River Yuman 835 Clallam 897 Upland Yuman 836 Coeur D'alene 898 Havasupai 837 Columbia 899 Walapai 838 Cowlitz 900 Yavapai 839 Salish 901 Chumash 840 Nootsack 841 Okanogan 902 Tonkawa 842 Puget Sound Salish 903 Yuchi 843 Quinault 844 Tillamook Siouan languages (904-914) 845 Twana 904 Crow 905 Hidatsa 846 Haida 906 Mandan A-3 907 Dakota 962 Tewa 908 Chiwere 963 Towa 909 Winnebago 910 Kansa 964 Zuni (Penutian) 911 Omaha 965 Chinook Jargon (Penutian) 912 Osage 966 American Indian 913 Ponca 914 Quapaw C e ntral and South American Languages (956-958, 967-976) 967 Misumalpan Muskogean languages (915-920) 968 Mayan Languages 915 Alabama 969 Tarascan (Penutian) 916 Choctaw 970 Mapuche 917 Mikasuki 971 Oto - Manguen 918 Hichita 972 Quechua 919 Koasati 973 Aymara 920 Muskogee 974 Arawakian 975 Chibchan 921 Chetemacha 976 Tupi-guarani 922 Yuki 923 Wappo 977 Jicarilla (Athapascan-Eyak) 924 Keres 978 Chiricahua (Athapascan-Eyak) 979 San Carlos (Athapascan-Eyak) Iroquian languages (925-933) 980 Kiowa-apache (Athapascan-Eyak) 925 Iroquois 981 Kalispel (Salish) 926 Mohawk 982 Spokane (Salish) 927 Oneida 983-994 Not used (Not on the edited file) 928 Onondaga 995 English (Not on the edited file) 929 Cayuga 996 Uncodable (Not on the edited file) 930 Seneca 997 Not used (Not on the edited file) 931 Tuscarora 983-997 Not used (On the edited file only) 932 Wyandot 998 Specified Not Listed 933 Cherokee 999 Not Specified Caddoan languages (934-937) 934 Arikara 935 Caddo 936 Pawnee 937 Wichita Uto-Aztecan languages (938-957) 938 Comanche 939 Mono 940 Paiute 941 Northern Paiute 942 Southern Paiute 943 Chemehuevi 944 Kawaiisu 945 Ute 946 Shoshoni 947 Panamint 948 Hopi 949 Cahuilla 950 Cupeno 951 Luiseno 952 Serrano 953 Tubatulabal 954 Pima 955 Yaqui 956 Aztecan(Cent/South America) 957 Sonoran, nec(Cent/So America) 958 Indian (Not on the edited file) Tanoan languages (863, 959-963) 959 Picuris 960 Tiwa 961 Sandia A-4.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Toward the Reconstruction of Proto-Algonquian-Wakashan. Part 3: the Algonquian-Wakashan 110-Item Wordlist
    Sergei L. Nikolaev Institute of Slavic studies of the Russian Academy of Sciences (Moscow/Novosibirsk); [email protected] Toward the reconstruction of Proto-Algonquian-Wakashan. Part 3: The Algonquian-Wakashan 110-item wordlist In the third part of my complex study of the historical relations between several language families of North America and the Nivkh language in the Far East, I present an annotated demonstration of the comparative data that was used in the lexicostatistical calculations to determine the branching and approximate glottochronological dating of Proto-Algonquian- Wakashan and its offspring; because of volume considerations, this data could not be in- cluded in the previous two parts of the present work and has to be presented autonomously. Additionally, several new Proto-Algonquian-Wakashan and Proto-Nivkh-Algonquian roots have been set up in this part of study. Lexicostatistical calculations have been conducted for the following languages: the reconstructed Proto-North Wakashan (approximately dated to ca. 800 AD) and modern or historically attested variants of Nootka (Nuuchahnulth), Amur Nivkh, Sakhalin Nivkh, Western Abenaki, Miami-Peoria, Fort Severn Cree, Wiyot, and Yurok. Keywords: Algonquian-Wakashan languages, Nivkh-Algonquian languages, Algic languages, Wakashan languages, Chimakuan-Wakashan languages, Nivkh language, historical phonol- ogy, comparative dictionary, lexicostatistics. The classification and preliminary glottochronological dating of Algonquian-Wakashan currently remain the same as presented in Nikolaev 2015a, Fig. 1 1. That scheme was generated based on the lexicostatistical analysis of 110-item basic word lists2 for one reconstructed (Proto-Northern Wakashan, ca. 800 A.D.) and several modern Algonquian-Wakashan lan- guages, performed with the aid of StarLing software 3.
    [Show full text]
  • Samuel Stehman Haldeman (1812–1880) Anthony Grant
    Chapter 5 A forgotten figure in Siouan and Caddoan linguistics: Samuel Stehman Haldeman (1812–1880) Anthony Grant In the light of Bob Rankin’s Dhegiha work, this paper examines some of the earliest recorded material on Kanza and Osage, collected and transcribed by the natural- ist Samuel Stehman Haldeman in an alphabet of his own devising (Haldeman 1859; 1860). Although his transcriptions fail to capture many crucial phonetic and phone- mic distinctions, they are useful as records of earlier and more conservative forms of these languages. 1 Introduction Robert Rankin’s examinations of earlier sources on Native American languages which have rarely been the subject of fuller description impel us to look at the work of other early collectors of data on Siouan and Caddoan languages. We may mention for instance his paper on Max von Wied’s (1839–1841) brief vocabulary of Kaw, Kanza or Kansa (Rankin 1994), Nor should we overlook his splendid sal- vage work on Kanza (the name I will use henceforth in this paper) and Quapaw, and his pivotal role in the organization of the Siouan-Caddoan Conferences. One researcher is almost overlooked nowadays (despite a memoir by Lesley 1886 which hymns his activities while getting its dedicatee’s name wrong). The naturalist, sawmill manager and avocational linguist Samuel Stehman Haldeman (1812–1880) was mostly known to the linguists in the 19th century for his ‘Ana- lytic Orthography’ (Haldeman 1859, also produced in book form as Haldeman 1860). This was a prizewinning attempt to construct a universal phonetic alpha- bet, based on Latin letters (and following some precepts of classical Ciceronian Latin pronunciation, for instance <C> for /k/ and <V> for /w/) but enhanced with some created symbols.
    [Show full text]
  • Fieldwork and Linguistic Analysis in Indigenous Languages of the Americas
    Fieldwork and Linguistic Analysis in Indigenous Languages of the Americas edited by Andrea L. Berez, Jean Mulder, and Daisy Rosenblum Language Documentation & Conservation Special Publication No. 2 Published as a sPecial Publication of language documentation & conservation language documentation & conservation Department of Linguistics, UHM Moore Hall 569 1890 East-West Road Honolulu, Hawai‘i 96822 USA http://nflrc.hawaii.edu/ldc university of hawai‘i Press 2840 Kolowalu Street Honolulu, Hawai‘i 96822-1888 USA © All texts and images are copyright to the respective authors. 2010 All chapters are licensed under Creative Commons Licenses Cover design by Cameron Chrichton Cover photograph of salmon drying racks near Lime Village, Alaska, by Andrea L. Berez Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication data ISBN 978-0-8248-3530-9 http://hdl.handle.net/10125/4463 Contents Foreword iii Marianne Mithun Contributors v Acknowledgments viii 1. Introduction: The Boasian tradition and contemporary practice 1 in linguistic fieldwork in the Americas Daisy Rosenblum and Andrea L. Berez 2. Sociopragmatic influences on the development and use of the 9 discourse marker vet in Ixil Maya Jule Gómez de García, Melissa Axelrod, and María Luz García 3. Classifying clitics in Sm’algyax: 33 Approaching theory from the field Jean Mulder and Holly Sellers 4. Noun class and number in Kiowa-Tanoan: Comparative-historical 57 research and respecting speakers’ rights in fieldwork Logan Sutton 5. The story of *o in the Cariban family 91 Spike Gildea, B.J. Hoff, and Sérgio Meira 6. Multiple functions, multiple techniques: 125 The role of methodology in a study of Zapotec determiners Donna Fenton 7.
    [Show full text]
  • Traditional Caddo Stories—7Th Grade
    Caddo Traditional Stories Personal Thoughts: My experience this past summer at the workshop and camping down the road at Mission Tejas State Park reinvigorated a personal connection to history. Most authors of history have been men. So, the word history, is simply restated as his story. The collection of oral stories was a tremendous task for early scholars. Winners of conflicts were often the ones to write down the tales of soldiers and politicians alike. Tales of everyday life were equally complex as the tales of battle. With Caddo stories, the main characters were often based on animals. So, a Caddo story can be a historical narrative featuring the environment, culture, and time period. The sounds of nighttime crawlers of the 21st century are the same sounds heard by the Caddo of Caddo Mounds State Historic Site. The nighttime sky above the forests of pine, pecan, and oak is the same as back then. The past is all around us, we just have to take it in. About This Lesson General Citation This lesson is based on the National Register of Historic Places registration files for Caddo Mounds State Historic Site (also known as the George C. Davis site) and materials prepared by the Texas Historical Commission. It was written by Kathy Lathen, a Texas educator with over a decade of classroom instructional experience. This lesson is one in a series that brings the important stories of historic places into classrooms across the country. Where is fits into Curriculum Topics and Time Period: This lesson could be incorporated with the Texas history unit on the historical era, Natural Texas and Its People (Prehistory to 1528).
    [Show full text]
  • Guide to the Robert Rankin Papers, 1886, 1914, 1956-2011
    Guide to the Robert Rankin papers, 1886, 1914, 1956-2011 Katie Duvall Funding for the processing of this collection was provided by the Wenner- Gren Foundation. Digitization and preparation of sound recordings for online access has been funded through generous support from the Arcadia Fund. November 2016 National Anthropological Archives Museum Support Center 4210 Silver Hill Road Suitland, Maryland 20746 [email protected] http://www.anthropology.si.edu/naa/ Table of Contents Collection Overview ........................................................................................................ 1 Administrative Information .............................................................................................. 1 Scope and Contents........................................................................................................ 3 Arrangement..................................................................................................................... 3 Biographical Note............................................................................................................. 2 Selected Bibliography...................................................................................................... 3 Names and Subjects ...................................................................................................... 3 Container Listing ............................................................................................................. 5 Series 1: Quapaw, 1972-1991, undated.................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • On Numeral Complexity in Hunter-Gatherer Languages
    On numeral complexity in hunter-gatherer languages PATIENCE EPPS, CLAIRE BOWERN, CYNTHIA A. HANSEN, JANE H. HILL, and JASON ZENTZ Abstract Numerals vary extensively across the world’s languages, ranging from no pre- cise numeral terms to practically infinite limits. Particularly of interest is the category of “small” or low-limit numeral systems; these are often associated with hunter-gatherer groups, but this connection has not yet been demonstrated by a systematic study. Here we present the results of a wide-scale survey of hunter-gatherer numerals. We compare these to agriculturalist languages in the same regions, and consider them against the broader typological backdrop of contemporary numeral systems in the world’s languages. We find that cor- relations with subsistence pattern are relatively weak, but that numeral trends are clearly areal. Keywords: borrowing, hunter-gatherers, linguistic area, number systems, nu- merals 1. Introduction Numerals are intriguing as a linguistic category: they are lexical elements on the one hand, but on the other they are effectively grammatical in that they may involve a generative system to derive higher values, and they interact with grammatical systems of quantification. Numeral systems are particularly note- worthy for their considerable crosslinguistic variation, such that languages may range from having no precise numeral terms at all to having systems whose limits are practically infinite. As Andersen (2005: 26) points out, numerals are thus a “liminal” linguistic category that is subject to cultural elaboration. Recent work has called attention to this variation among numeral systems, particularly with reference to systems having very low limits (for example, see Evans & Levinson 2009, D.
    [Show full text]
  • PROTO-SIOUAN PHONOLOGY and GRAMMAR Robert L. Rankin, Richard T
    PROTO-SIOUAN PHONOLOGY AND GRAMMAR Robert L. Rankin, Richard T. Carter and A. Wesley Jones Univ. of Kansas, Univ. of Nebraska and Univ. of Mary The intellectual work on the Comparative Siouan Dictionary is relatively complete we and now have a picture of Proto-Siouan phonology and grammar. 1 The following is our Proto-Siouan pho­ neme inventory with a number of explanatory comments: labial dental palatal velar glottal STOPS Preaspirates: hp ht hk Postaspirates: ph th kh Glottals: p? t? k? ? Plain: p t k FRICATIVES voiceless: s g x h glottal: s? g? x? RESONANTS sonorant: w r y obstruent: W R VOWELS oral vowels: i u e 0 a nasal vowels: i- II ACCENT: 1'1 (high vs, non-high) & (possibly IAI falling) VOWEL LENGTH: I-I (+long) PREASPIRATED VOICELESS STOPS. We treat these as units be­ cause they incorporate a laryngeal feature that has attached it­ self to the stop, and because speakers today treat the reflexes of the series as single units for purposes of syllabification and segmentability. However, in pre-Proto-Siouan it is possible that there was no preaspirated series. The preaspirates pretty clearly arose as regular allophonic variants of plain voiceless stops preceding an accented vowel. This was pointed out by Dick Carter for Ofo in 1984. Even so, we have a number of lexical sets where it appears to be necessary to reconstruct plain voiceless stops in this environment also. Therefore, by the Proto-Siouan period the distinction between plain and preaspirated stops had appar- ently been phonemicized as shown by the following cognate sets:
    [Show full text]
  • Native American Languages, Indigenous Languages of the Native Peoples of North, Middle, and South America
    Native American Languages, indigenous languages of the native peoples of North, Middle, and South America. The precise number of languages originally spoken cannot be known, since many disappeared before they were documented. In North America, around 300 distinct, mutually unintelligible languages were spoken when Europeans arrived. Of those, 187 survive today, but few will continue far into the 21st century, since children are no longer learning the vast majority of these. In Middle America (Mexico and Central America) about 300 languages have been identified, of which about 140 are still spoken. South American languages have been the least studied. Around 1500 languages are known to have been spoken, but only about 350 are still in use. These, too are disappearing rapidly. Classification A major task facing scholars of Native American languages is their classification into language families. (A language family consists of all languages that have evolved from a single ancestral language, as English, German, French, Russian, Greek, Armenian, Hindi, and others have all evolved from Proto-Indo-European.) Because of the vast number of languages spoken in the Americas, and the gaps in our information about many of them, the task of classifying these languages is a challenging one. In 1891, Major John Wesley Powell proposed that the languages of North America constituted 58 independent families, mainly on the basis of superficial vocabulary resemblances. At the same time Daniel Brinton posited 80 families for South America. These two schemes form the basis of subsequent classifications. In 1929 Edward Sapir tentatively proposed grouping these families into superstocks, 6 in North America and 15 in Middle America.
    [Show full text]
  • Languages of the World--Native America
    REPOR TRESUMES ED 010 352 46 LANGUAGES OF THE WORLD-NATIVE AMERICA FASCICLE ONE. BY- VOEGELIN, C. F. VOEGELIN, FLORENCE N. INDIANA UNIV., BLOOMINGTON REPORT NUMBER NDEA-VI-63-5 PUB DATE JUN64 CONTRACT MC-SAE-9486 EDRS PRICENF-$0.27 HC-C6.20 155P. ANTHROPOLOGICAL LINGUISTICS, 6(6)/1-149, JUNE 1964 DESCRIPTORS- *AMERICAN INDIAN LANGUAGES, *LANGUAGES, BLOOMINGTON, INDIANA, ARCHIVES OF LANGUAGES OF THE WORLD THE NATIVE LANGUAGES AND DIALECTS OF THE NEW WORLD"ARE DISCUSSED.PROVIDED ARE COMPREHENSIVE LISTINGS AND DESCRIPTIONS OF THE LANGUAGES OF AMERICAN INDIANSNORTH OF MEXICO ANDOF THOSE ABORIGINAL TO LATIN AMERICA..(THIS REPOR4 IS PART OF A SEkIES, ED 010 350 TO ED 010 367.)(JK) $. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH,EDUCATION nib Office ofEduc.442n MD WELNicitt weenment Lasbeenreproduced a l l e a l O exactly r o n o odianeting es receivromed f the Sabi donot rfrocestarity it. Pondsof viewor position raimentofficial opinions or pritcy. Offkce ofEducation rithrppologicalLinguistics Volume 6 Number 6 ,Tune 1964 LANGUAGES OF TEM'WORLD: NATIVE AMER/CAFASCICLEN. A Publication of this ARC IVES OF LANGUAGESor 111-E w oRLD Anthropology Doparignont Indiana, University ANTHROPOLOGICAL LINGUISTICS is designed primarily, butnot exclusively, for the immediate publication of data-oriented papers for which attestation is available in the form oftape recordings on deposit in the Archives of Languages of the World. This does not imply that contributors will bere- stricted to scholars working in the Archives at Indiana University; in fact,one motivation for the publication
    [Show full text]
  • Download Download
    The Southern Algonquians and Their Neighbours DAVID H. PENTLAND University of Manitoba INTRODUCTION At least fifty named Indian groups are known to have lived in the area south of the Mason-Dixon line and north of the Creek and the other Muskogean tribes. The exact number and the specific names vary from one source to another, but all agree that there were many different tribes in Maryland, Virginia and the Carolinas during the colonial period. Most also agree that these fifty or more tribes all spoke languages that can be assigned to just three language families: Algonquian, Iroquoian, and Siouan. In the case of a few favoured groups there is little room for debate. It is certain that the Powhatan spoke an Algonquian language, that the Tuscarora and Cherokee are Iroquoians, and that the Catawba speak a Siouan language. In other cases the linguistic material cannot be positively linked to one particular political group. There are several vocabularies of an Algonquian language that are labelled Nanticoke, but Ives Goddard (1978:73) has pointed out that Murray collected his "Nanticoke" vocabulary at the Choptank village on the Eastern Shore, and Heckeweld- er's vocabularies were collected from refugees living in Ontario. Should the language be called Nanticoke, Choptank, or something else? And if it is Nanticoke, did the Choptank speak the same language, a different dialect, a different Algonquian language, or some completely unrelated language? The basic problem, of course, is the lack of reliable linguistic data from most of this region. But there are additional complications. It is known that some Indians were bilingual or multilingual (cf.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 the Phonology of Wakashan Languages Adam Werle University
    1 The Phonology of Wakashan Languages Adam Werle University of Victoria, March 2010 Abstract This article offers an overview of the phonological typology and analysis of the Wakashan languages, namely Haisla, Heiltsukvla (Heiltsuk, Bella Bella), Oowekyala, Kwak’wala (Kwakiutl), Nuu-chah-nulth (Nootka), Ditidaht (Nitinaht), and Makah. Like other languages of the Northwest Coast of North America, these have many consonants, including several laterals, front and back dorsals, few labials, contrastive glottalization and lip rounding, and a glottal stop with similar distribution to other consonants. Consonant-vowel sequences are characterized by large obstruent clusters, and no hiatus. Of theoretical interest at the segmental level are consonant mutations, positional neutralizations of laryngeal features, vowel-glide alternations, glottalized vowels and glottalized voiced plosives, and historical loss of nasal consonants. Also addressed here are aspects of these languages’ rich prosodic morphology, such as patterns of reduplication and templatic stem modifications, the distribution of Northern Wakashan schwa, alternations in Southern Wakashan vowel length and presence, and the syllabification of all-obstruent words. 1. Introduction The Wakashan language are spoken in what are now British Columbia, Canada, and Washington State, USA. The family comprises a northern branch—Haisla, Heiltsukvla, Oowekyala, and Kwa kwala—and̓ a southern branch—Nuu-chah-nulth, Ditidaht, and Makah— that diverge significantly from each other, but are internally very similar. They are endangered, being spoken natively by about 350 people, out of ethnic populations of about 23,000 whose main language is English. At the same time, most are undergoing active revitalization, with about 1,000 semi-speakers and learners ( First Peoples’ Language Map ).
    [Show full text]
  • 33 Contact and North American Languages
    9781405175807_4_033 1/15/10 5:37 PM Page 673 33 Contact and North American Languages MARIANNE MITHUN Languages indigenous to the Americas offer some good opportunities for inves- tigating effects of contact in shaping grammar. Well over 2000 languages are known to have been spoken at the time of first contacts with Europeans. They are not a monolithic group: they fall into nearly 200 distinct genetic units. Yet against this backdrop of genetic diversity, waves of typological similarities suggest pervasive, longstanding multilingualism. Of particular interest are similarities of a type that might seem unborrowable, patterns of abstract structure without shared substance. The Americas do show the kinds of contact effects common elsewhere in the world. There are some strong linguistic areas, on the Northwest Coast, in California, in the Southeast, and in the Pueblo Southwest of North America; in Mesoamerica; and in Amazonia in South America (Bright 1973; Sherzer 1973; Haas 1976; Campbell, Kaufman, & Stark 1986; Thompson & Kinkade 1990; Silverstein 1996; Campbell 1997; Mithun 1999; Beck 2000; Aikhenvald 2002; Jany 2007). Numerous additional linguistic areas and subareas of varying sizes and strengths have also been identified. In some cases all domains of language have been affected by contact. In some, effects are primarily lexical. But in many, there is surprisingly little shared vocabulary in contrast with pervasive structural parallelism. The focus here will be on some especially deeply entrenched structures. It has often been noted that morphological structure is highly resistant to the influence of contact. Morphological similarities have even been proposed as better indicators of deep genetic relationship than the traditional comparative method.
    [Show full text]