DOCSLIB.ORG

I OOWEKYALA SEGMENTAL PHONOLOGY by DARIN MATHEW HOWE B.A. (Hons.), University of Ottawa, 1994 M.A., University of Ottawa, 1995 A

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
I OOWEKYALA SEGMENTAL PHONOLOGY by DARIN MATHEW HOWE B.A. (Hons.), University of Ottawa, 1994 M.A., University of Ottawa, 1995 A OOWEKYALA SEGMENTAL PHONOLOGY by DARIN MATHEW HOWE B.A. (Hons.), University of Ottawa, 1994 M.A., University of Ottawa, 1995 A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY in THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES (Department of Linguistics) We accept this thesis as conforming to the required standard Supervisory Committee: Patricia A. Shaw (Linguistics, UBC) Douglas Pulleyblank (Linguistics, UBC) Emmon Bach (Linguistics, UMass, Amherst) Examination Committee Chair: Edwin G. Pulleyblank (Asian Studies, UBC) University Examiners: Ross King (Asian Studies, UBC) Henry Davis (Linguistics, UBC) External Examiner: Stuart Davis (Linguistics, Indiana U), not physically present THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA December 2000 © Darin Mathew Howe, 2000 i ii Abstract This dissertation treats the sound pattern of Oowekyala, a nearly extinct Wakashan language of British Columbia. Proposed analyses are set in Optimality Theory (Prince & Smolensky 1993). Following an introduction to the language (its speakers, their location, adjacent languages, etc.) and to the adopted theory, the discussion focuses on three dimensions of Oowekyala phonology: intrasegmental, intersegmental, and correspondence-related. The segment-internal (paradigmatic) phonology results from the interaction between lexical faithfulness and context-free markedness constraints. This interaction is discussed with respect to the various features that cross-classify the segment inventory of Oowekyala. For instance, it is argued that laryngeals are [+sonorant], that affricates are [-continuant], that [+voice] and [+constricted glottis] occur as floating elements and that these floaters may cause lenition (insertion of [+sonorant]), and that gutturals (uvulars and laryngeals) are [-ATR]. Intersegmental (syntagmatic) patterns result from the interaction between lexical faithfulness and context-sensitive markedness constraints. Patterns discussed include: rounding of obstruents, degemination, spirantisation/deocclusivisation, continuancy dissimilation, voicing neutralisation, allophonic vowel lowering and resonant debuccalisation. Exceptional phonological patterns that cannot be explained through the interaction between input-output faithfulness constraints and markedness constraints are addressed last. It is proposed that these exceptional patterns reflect various correspondence relations (cf. McCarthy & Prince 1995, 1999 on Correspondence Theory): base-reduplicant correspondence, output-to-output correspondence, and candidate-to-candidate correspondence. iii iv Table of contents Abstract .................................................................................................................................. iii Table of contents ......................................................................................................................v Acknowledgments...................................................................................................................vii Key to sources cited ...............................................................................................................viii 1. Introduction...................................................................................................................... 1 1.1. Language background............................................................................................... 1 1.1.1. Speakers and location........................................................................................ 1 1.1.2. Adjacent languages ........................................................................................... 3 1.1.3. Previous documentation .................................................................................... 7 1.1.4. On “degenerate” syllables .................................................................................. 9 1.2. Theoretical background........................................................................................... 18 1.2.1. Optimality Theory............................................................................................ 18 1.2.2. Correspondence Theory................................................................................... 19 2. Intrasegmental phonology .............................................................................................. 21 2.1. Introduction: the segment inventory of Oowekyala .................................................. 21 2.2. Stricture features..................................................................................................... 22 2.2.1. Major class features......................................................................................... 22 2.2.2. Continuancy .................................................................................................... 25 2.3. Laryngeal features................................................................................................... 30 2.3.1. Laryngeal features in stops and affricates ........................................................ 30 2.3.2. Laryngeal features and fricatives...................................................................... 41 2.3.3. Laryngeal contrasts in sonorants ..................................................................... 50 2.3.4. Laryngeal contrasts in vowels .......................................................................... 53 2.4. Articulatory features................................................................................................ 56 2.4.1. Introduction .................................................................................................... 56 2.4.2. Lips ................................................................................................................. 56 2.4.3. Tongue Blade................................................................................................... 60 2.4.4. Tongue Body ................................................................................................... 64 2.4.5. Soft Palate ....................................................................................................... 70 2.4.6. Tongue Root.................................................................................................... 71 2.5. Intrasegmental phonology: conclusion .................................................................... 77 3. Intersegmental phonology .............................................................................................. 80 3.1. Introduction ............................................................................................................ 80 3.2. Rounding in consonants.......................................................................................... 80 3.2.1. Neutralisation after /u/.................................................................................... 81 3.2.2. Rounding assimilation between obstruents ...................................................... 89 3.3. Degemination ......................................................................................................... 95 3.3.1. Introduction .................................................................................................... 95 3.3.2. OT analysis...................................................................................................... 99 v 3.3.3. Rounding stability in degemination................................................................ 100 3.4. Spirantisation/deocclusivisation ............................................................................ 104 3.4.1. Introduction .................................................................................................. 104 3.4.2. OT analysis.................................................................................................... 108 3.4.3. Special cases of spirantisation ....................................................................... 111 3.4.4. Exceptions to spirantisation/deocclusivisation ............................................... 117 3.5. Coronal fricative dissimilation ............................................................................... 119 3.5.1. Description.................................................................................................... 119 3.5.2. OT analysis.................................................................................................... 124 3.5.3. Interaction with spirantisation........................................................................ 125 3.6. Voicing neutralisation ........................................................................................... 129 3.6.1. Description.................................................................................................... 129 3.6.2. Two OT analyses of voicing neutralisation...................................................... 135 3.6.3. Voicing in loan word phonology..................................................................... 138 3.6.4. Evidence for [-voice]...................................................................................... 145 3.7. Allophonic variation .............................................................................................. 153 3.7.1. Vowel lowering .............................................................................................. 153 3.7.2. Derived laryngeals ......................................................................................... 154 4. Segmental correspondence ..........................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Comparing a Surface Collection to an Excavated Collection in the Lower Skagit River Delta at 45SK51
    Central Washington University ScholarWorks@CWU All Master's Theses Master's Theses Summer 2017 Comparing a Surface Collection to an Excavated Collection in the Lower Skagit River Delta at 45SK51 Sherri M. Middleton Central Washington University, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.cwu.edu/etd Part of the Archaeological Anthropology Commons, and the Other History of Art, Architecture, and Archaeology Commons Recommended Citation Middleton, Sherri M., "Comparing a Surface Collection to an Excavated Collection in the Lower Skagit River Delta at 45SK51" (2017). All Master's Theses. 711. https://digitalcommons.cwu.edu/etd/711 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Master's Theses at ScholarWorks@CWU. It has been accepted for inclusion in All Master's Theses by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks@CWU. For more information, please contact [email protected]. COMPARING A SURFACE COLLECTION TO AN EXCAVATED COLLECTION IN THE LOWER SKAGIT RIVER DELTA AT 45SK51 ________________________________________________________________________ A Thesis Presented to The Graduate Faculty Central Washington University ________________________________________________________________________ In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Master of Science Cultural and Environmental Resource Management _______________________________________________________________________ by Sherri Michelle Middleton June 2017 CENTRAL WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY Graduate Studies We hereby approve the
    [Show full text]
  • A Salmon Monitoring & Stewardship Framework for British Columbia's Central Coast
    A Salmon Monitoring & Stewardship Framework for British Columbia’s Central Coast REPORT · 2021 citation Atlas, W. I., K. Connors, L. Honka, J. Moody, C. N. Service, V. Brown, M .Reid, J. Slade, K. McGivney, R. Nelson, S. Hutchings, L. Greba, I. Douglas, R. Chapple, C. Whitney, H. Hammer, C. Willis, and S. Davies. (2021). A Salmon Monitoring & Stewardship Framework for British Columbia’s Central Coast. Vancouver, BC, Canada: Pacific Salmon Foundation. authors Will Atlas, Katrina Connors, Jason Slade Rich Chapple, Charlotte Whitney Leah Honka Wuikinuxv Fisheries Program Central Coast Indigenous Resource Alliance Salmon Watersheds Program, Wuikinuxv Village, BC Campbell River, BC Pacific Salmon Foundation Vancouver, BC Kate McGivney Haakon Hammer, Chris Willis North Coast Stock Assessment, Snootli Hatchery, Jason Moody Fisheries and Oceans Canada Fisheries and Oceans Canada Nuxalk Fisheries Program Bella Coola, BC Bella Coola, BC Bella Coola, BC Stan Hutchings, Ralph Nelson Shaun Davies Vernon Brown, Larry Greba, Salmon Charter Patrol Services, North Coast Stock Assessment, Christina Service Fisheries and Oceans Canada Fisheries and Oceans Canada Kitasoo / Xai’xais Stewardship Authority BC Prince Rupert, BC Klemtu, BC Ian Douglas Mike Reid Salmonid Enhancement Program, Heiltsuk Integrated Resource Fisheries and Oceans Canada Management Department Bella Coola, BC Bella Bella, BC published by Pacific Salmon Foundation 300 – 1682 West 7th Avenue Vancouver, BC, V6J 4S6, Canada www.salmonwatersheds.ca A Salmon Monitoring & Stewardship Framework for British Columbia’s Central Coast REPORT 2021 Acknowledgements We thank everyone who has been a part of this collaborative Front cover photograph effort to develop a salmon monitoring and stewardship and photograph on pages 4–5 framework for the Central Coast of British Columbia.
    [Show full text]
  • An Early St'at'imcets-Chinook Jargon Bilingual' Text 1 Introduction 1 2 About the Newspaper
    "Fox and Cayooty": an early St'at'imcets-Chinook Jargon bilingual' text Henry Davis and David Robertson University of British Columbia and CHINOOK List This paper contains a transliteration (from the original Duployan shorthand) and . translation of an early bilingual St'at'imcets-Chinook Jargon text, with accompanying historical, orthographical and grammatical notes. The story was first published in 1892 in the Kamloops Wawa newspaper by the oblate priest J-M.R. Le Jeune; it thus counts as one of the earliest texts in either language. 1 Introduction 1 It is well known to the student of Salishan languages and cultures that before the time of Franz Boas, extremely few coherent texts, as opposed to relatively numerous fragmentary word-lists, of northwest Native American languages were collected and published. The nascent modern disciplines of anthropology and linguistics demanded such documentation. However, another force besides science played a considerable role in the earliest recordings of indigenous languages of this region: The activities of Christian missionaries, which led to work allowing in some cases (viz. Joseph Giorda, S1's 1871 dictionary of Kalispel) an excellent view of historical stages in the lives of these languages otherwise lost to us.2 An example of the same phenomenon is available to us also in the Kamloops Wawa newspaper published by Oblate father J.-M.R. Le Jeune from 1891 to about 19043, primarily in the Chinook Jargon, of which it is an extensive and often overlooked document. In volume 2, Issue 47 of Kamloops Wawa, dated October 16 [sic], 18924, we find under the English heading "Recreative" the following: Kopa Pavilion ilihi nsaika tlap ukuk hloima syisim kopa Lilwat wawa[:] Fox and Cayooty.~.
    [Show full text]
  • Lillooet Between Sechelt and Shuswap Jan P. Van Eijk First
    Lillooet between Sechelt and Shuswap Jan P. van Eijk First Nations University of Canada Although most details of the grammatical and lexical structure of Lillooet put this language firmly within the Interior branch of the Salish language family, Lillooet also shares some features with the Coast or Central branch. In this paper we describe some of the similarities between Lillooet and one of its closest Interior relatives, viz., Shuswap, and we also note some similarities be­ tween Lillooet and Sechelt, one of Lillooet' s western neighbours but belonging to the Coast branch. Particular attention is paid to some obvious loans between Lillooet and Sechelt. 1 Introduction Lillooet belongs with Shuswap to the Interior branch of the Salish language family, while Sechelt belongs to the Coast or Central branch. In what follows we describe the similarities and differences between Lillooet and both Shuswap and Sechelt, under the following headings: Phonology (section 2), Morphology (3), Lexicon (4), and Lillooet-Sechelt borrowings (5). Conclusions are given in 6. I omit a comparison between the syntactic patterns of these three languages, since my information on Sechelt syntax is limited to a brief text (Timmers 1974), and Beaumont 1985 is currently unavailable to me. Although borrowings between Lillooet and Shuswap have obviously taken place, many of these will be impossible to trace due to the close over-all resemblance between these two languages. Shuswap data are mainly drawn from the western dialects, as described in Kuipers 1974 and 1975. (For a description of the eastern dialects I refer to Kuipers 1989.) Lillooet data are from Van Eijk 1997, while Sechelt data are from Timmers 1973, 1974, 1977.
    [Show full text]
  • We Are the Wuikinuxv Nation
    WE ARE THE WUIKINUXV NATION WE ARE THE WUIKINUXV NATION A collaboration with the Wuikinuxv Nation. Written and produced by Pam Brown, MOA Curator, Pacific Northwest, 2011. 1 We Are The Wuikinuxv Nation UBC Museum of Anthropology Pacific Northwest sourcebook series Copyright © Wuikinuxv Nation UBC Museum of Anthropology, 2011 University of British Columbia 6393 N.W. Marine Drive Vancouver, B.C. V6T 1Z2 www.moa.ubc.ca All Rights Reserved A collaboration with the Wuikinuxv Nation, 2011. Written and produced by Pam Brown, Curator, Pacific Northwest, Designed by Vanessa Kroeker Front cover photographs, clockwise from top left: The House of Nuakawa, Big House opening, 2006. Photo: George Johnson. Percy Walkus, Wuikinuxv Elder, traditional fisheries scientist and innovator. Photo: Ted Walkus. Hereditary Chief Jack Johnson. Photo: Harry Hawthorn fonds, Archives, UBC Museum of Anthropology. Wuikinuxv woman preparing salmon. Photo: C. MacKay, 1952, #2005.001.162, Archives, UBC Museum of Anthropology. Stringing eulachons. (Young boy at right has been identified as Norman Johnson.) Photo: C. MacKay, 1952, #2005.001.165, Archives, UBC Museum of Anthropology. Back cover photograph: Set of four Hàmac! a masks, collection of Peter Chamberlain and Lila Walkus. Photo: C. MacKay, 1952, #2005.001.166, Archives, UBC Museum of Anthropology. MOA programs are supported by visitors, volunteer associates, members, and donors; Canada Foundation for Innovation; Canada Council for the Arts; Department of Canadian Heritage Young Canada Works; BC Arts Council; Province of British Columbia; Aboriginal Career Community Employment Services Society; The Audain Foundation for the Visual Arts; Michael O’Brian Family Foundation; Vancouver Foundation; Consulat General de Vancouver; and the TD Bank Financial Group.
    [Show full text]
  • Is Phonological Consonant Epenthesis Possible? a Series of Artificial Grammar Learning Experiments
    Is Phonological Consonant Epenthesis Possible? A Series of Artificial Grammar Learning Experiments Rebecca L. Morley Abstract Consonant epenthesis is typically assumed to be part of the basic repertoire of phonological gram- mars. This implies that there exists some set of linguistic data that entails epenthesis as the best analy- sis. However, a series of artificial grammar learning experiments found no evidence that learners ever selected an epenthesis analysis. Instead, phonetic and morphological biases were revealed, along with individual variation in how learners generalized and regularized their input. These results, in combi- nation with previous work, suggest that synchronic consonant epenthesis may only emerge very rarely, from a gradual accumulation of changes over time. It is argued that the theoretical status of epenthesis must be reconsidered in light of these results, and that investigation of the sufficient learning conditions, and the diachronic developments necessary to produce those conditions, are of central importance to synchronic theory generally. 1 Introduction Epenthesis is defined as insertion of a segment that has no correspondent in the relevant lexical, or un- derlying, form. There are various types of epenthesis that can be defined in terms of either the insertion environment, the features of the epenthesized segment, or both. The focus of this paper is on consonant epenthesis and, more specifically, default consonant epenthesis that results in markedness reduction (e.g. Prince and Smolensky (1993/2004)). Consonant
    [Show full text]
  • Linguistics 181: SENĆOŦEN Fall 2010 Leonard and Werle 3 Handout 2
    Linguistics 181: SENĆOŦEN Fall 2010 Leonard and Werle Handout 2: Language families of British Columbia Terminology ‣ language : a natural system of human communication that includes sounds, words, and rules for combining these to express a variety of meanings. ‣ native language , first language : a language that one speaks from a very young age. ‣ indigenous , aboriginal : these terms refer to people or languages that live in or are associated with a particular place, are the first or among the first to be associated with that place, and have historical and cultural roots from that place. ‣ dialect : a regional or social variety of a language. Everyone speaks a dialect! ‣ idiolect : the speech variety of a particular person. One’s individual dialect. ‣ jargon : vocabulary associated with a particular activity (example: carvers’ jargon). ‣ pidgin : a simplified language used by speakers of different languages to communicate (example: Chinook Jargon). No one’s native language. ‣ creole : a pidgin that has developed into a full language (example: Hawaiian Creole). ‣ language family : a group of languages whose similarities indicate that they come from a common parent language. Such languages are said to be genetically related (whether or not the speakers of these languages are related by blood). ‣ language area ( Sprachbund ): a group of languages whose similarities result from geographical contact. Such languages may or may not be genetically related. Notes The aboriginal languages of British Columbia form about seven language families (see map). SENĆOŦEN, or Saanich, is a member of the Salish family. language family examples ‣ Algonquian Cree, Ojibway ‣ Haida X̱aad Kil, X̱aaydaa Kil ‣ Kutenai Ktunaxa ‣ Na-Dene Nicola, Tsilhqot’in, Dakelh, Łingít ‣ Salishan SENĆOŦEN, Halq’eméylem, Secwepemctsin, Nuxalk ‣ Tsimshianic S’m̓algya̱x, Nisg ̱a’a ‣ Wakashan Nuu-chah-nulth, Kwak wala,̓ Haisla Salish is one of the largest indigenous language families of North America, in terms of number of languages.
    [Show full text]
  • A Typology of Consonant Agreement As Correspondence
    A TYPOLOGY OF CONSONANT AGREEMENT AS CORRESPONDENCE SHARON ROSE RACHEL WALKER University of California, San Diego University of Southern California This article presents a typology of consonant harmony or LONG DISTANCE CONSONANT AGREEMENT that is analyzed as arisingthroughcorrespondence relations between consonants rather than feature spreading. The model covers a range of agreement patterns (nasal, laryngeal, liquid, coronal, dorsal) and offers several advantages. Similarity of agreeing consonants is central to the typology and is incorporated directly into the constraints drivingcorrespondence. Agreementby correspon- dence without feature spreadingcaptures the neutrality of interveningsegments,which neither block nor undergo. Case studies of laryngeal agreement and nasal agreement are presented, demon- stratingthe model’s capacity to capture varyingdegreesof similarity crosslinguistically.* 1. INTRODUCTION. The action at a distance that is characteristic of CONSONANT HAR- MONIES stands as a pivotal problem to be addressed by phonological theory. Consider the nasal alternations in the Bantu language, Kikongo (Meinhof 1932, Dereau 1955, Webb 1965, Ao 1991, Odden 1994, Piggott 1996). In this language, the voiced stop in the suffix [-idi] in la is realized as [ini] in 1b when preceded by a nasal consonant at any distance in the stem constituent, consistingof root and suffixes. (1) a. m-[bud-idi]stem ‘I hit’ b. tu-[kun-ini]stem ‘we planted’ n-[suk-idi]stem ‘I washed’ tu-[nik-ini]stem ‘we ground’ In addition to the alternation in 1, there are no Kikongo roots containing a nasal followed by a voiced stop, confirmingthat nasal harmony or AGREEMENT, as we term it, also holds at the root level as a MORPHEME STRUCTURE CONSTRAINT (MSC).
    [Show full text]
  • Reduplicated Numerals in Salish. PUB DATE 1997-00-00 NOTE 11P.; for Complete Volume, See FL 025 251
    DOCUMENT RESUME ED 419 409 FL 025 252 AUTHOR Anderson, Gregory D. S. TITLE Reduplicated Numerals in Salish. PUB DATE 1997-00-00 NOTE 11p.; For complete volume, see FL 025 251. PUB TYPE Journal Articles (080) Reports Research (143) JOURNAL CIT Kansas Working Papers in Linguistics; v22 n2 p1-10 1997 EDRS PRICE MF01/PC01 Plus Postage. DESCRIPTORS *American Indian Languages; Contrastive Linguistics; Language Patterns; *Language Research; Language Variation; *Linguistic Theory; Number Systems; *Salish; *Structural Analysis (Linguistics); Uncommonly Taught Languages ABSTRACT A salient characteristic of the morpho-lexical systems of the Salish languages is the widespread use of reduplication in both derivational and inflectional functions. Salish reduplication signals such typologically common categories as "distributive/plural," "repetitive/continuative," and "diminutive," the cross-linguistically marked but typically Salish notion of "out-of-control" or more restricted categories in particular Salish languages. In addition to these functions, reduplication also plays a role in numeral systems of the Salish languages. The basic forms of several numerals appear to be reduplicated throughout the Salish family. In addition, correspondences among the various Interior Salish languages suggest the association of certain reduplicative patterns with particular "counting forms" referring to specific nominal categories. While developments in the other Salish language are frequently more idiosyncratic and complex, comparative evidence suggests that the
    [Show full text]
  • Halkomelem Denominal Verbs' 1 Denominal Verbs
    Halkomelem denominal verbs' Donna B. Gerdts and Thomas E. Hukari Simon Fraser University and University of Victoria Halkomelem has four denominal verb prefixes: c- 'have, get, make, do', I-'ingest, partake', txW- 'buy', i- 'go to'. These prefixes attach to nominal bases to form intransitive verbs. The noun to which the prefix attaches is usually unspecified, generic, or non-individuated and can be doubled with a free­ standing nominal of more specific meaning. Syntactically, this nominal is an oblique object, parallel to patients of antipassive or applicative constructions. Denominal verb constructions are widely used, especially for denoting possession. As in the case of denominal verbs in other languages, they can be formed­ quite freely, as long as the situation allows for an interpretation. 1 Denominal verbs Some intransitive verbs in Halkomelem are composed of a noun base, such as stiqiw 'horse', 8X wimel 'store', or sqew8 'potato', together with a verbalizing prefix.2 These forms appear in a denominal verb construction, where the derived form serves as an intransitive verb.3 I We would like to express our appreciation to the speakers of Island Halkomelem who have provide data for this paper, especially Arnold Guerin, Ruby Peter, and Theresa Thome. We appreciate editorial assistance from Kaoru Kiyosawa, Todd Peterson, and Charles Ulrich. Thanks to audiences at BLS, CLA, and WSCLA for comments on earlier versions of this paper. Funding for our research comes from a Jacobs Fund Grant and SSHRC Standard Research Grants #410-2001-1335 and #410-96-1247. 2 The nominal prefix s- disappears after c- and /- but not after tx w_ and i-.
    [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]
  • Language List 2019
    First Nations Languages in British Columbia – Revised June 2019 Family1 Language Name2 Other Names3 Dialects4 #5 Communities Where Spoken6 Anishnaabemowin Saulteau 7 1 Saulteau First Nations ALGONQUIAN 1. Anishinaabemowin Ojibway ~ Ojibwe Saulteau Plains Ojibway Blueberry River First Nations Fort Nelson First Nation 2. Nēhiyawēwin ᓀᐦᐃᔭᐍᐏᐣ Saulteau First Nations ALGONQUIAN Cree Nēhiyawēwin (Plains Cree) 1 West Moberly First Nations Plains Cree Many urban areas, especially Vancouver Cheslatta Carrier Nation Nak’albun-Dzinghubun/ Lheidli-T’enneh First Nation Stuart-Trembleur Lake Lhoosk’uz Dene Nation Lhtako Dene Nation (Tl’azt’en, Yekooche, Nadleh Whut’en First Nation Nak’azdli) Nak’azdli Whut’en ATHABASKAN- ᑕᗸᒡ NaZko First Nation Saik’uz First Nation Carrier 12 EYAK-TLINGIT or 3. Dakelh Fraser-Nechakoh Stellat’en First Nation 8 Taculli ~ Takulie NA-DENE (Cheslatta, Sdelakoh, Nadleh, Takla Lake First Nation Saik’uZ, Lheidli) Tl’azt’en Nation Ts’il KaZ Koh First Nation Ulkatcho First Nation Blackwater (Lhk’acho, Yekooche First Nation Lhoosk’uz, Ndazko, Lhtakoh) Urban areas, especially Prince George and Quesnel 1 Please see the appendix for definitions of family, language and dialect. 2 The “Language Names” are those used on First Peoples' Language Map of British Columbia (http://fp-maps.ca) and were compiled in consultation with First Nations communities. 3 The “Other Names” are names by which the language is known, today or in the past. Some of these names may no longer be in use and may not be considered acceptable by communities but it is useful to include them in order to assist with the location of language resources which may have used these alternate names.
    [Show full text]