A Sociolinguistic Survey of the Ethnolinguistic Groups Around the Intersection of the Marmelos River and the Trans-Amazon Highway

DigitalResources Electronic Survey Report 2018-014

Stan Anonby

A Sociolinguistic Survey of the Ethnolinguistic Groups Around the Intersection of the Marmelos River and the Trans-Amazon Highway

Stan Anonby

SIL International® 2018

Data and materials collected by researchers in an era before documentation of permission was standardized may be included in this publication. SIL makes diligent efforts to identify and acknowledge sources and to obtain appropriate permissions wherever possible, acting in good faith and on the best information available at the time of publication.

Abstract

This report is of a 2009 survey regarding the sociolinguistic vitality of five ethnolinguistic groups in an area of the Brazilian Amazon roughly to the west of the city of Humaitá. The ethnicities and the ISO codes for the languages they speak are Torá (trz), Pirahã (myp), Parintintín (pah), Diahui (pah), and Tenharim (pah); the latter three speak the same language. The writer visited many villages and describes the way the people use their language. Generally, the longer ethnic groups have had contact with Portuguese-speaking outsider Brazilian nationals “Brazilians,” the weaker their language is. Three of the five ethnic groups appear to be good examples of this. Two are anomalous. One of these has a very weak language even though they have been in contact with outsiders for a short time. The other group has interacted with Brazilians for centuries yet their language remains strong. The report will speculate as to the reasons why this is so.

Contents

1 Introduction 1.1 Purpose and methodology 1.2 Languages 1.3 Geography 1.4 Population distribution 1.4.1 Torá 1.4.2 Pirahã 1.4.3 Parintintín 1.4.4 Diahui 1.4.5 Tenharim 2 Previous scholarship 2.1 Torá 2.2 Pirahã 2.3 Parintintín 2.4 Diahui 2.5 Tenharim 3 History 3.1 Torá 3.2 Pirahã 3.3 Kagwahiva 3.4 Parintintín 3.5 Diahui 3.6 Tenharim 4 Social factors relevant to the sociolinguistic environment 4.1 Economy 4.1.1 Torá 4.1.2 Pirahã 4.1.3 Parintintín 4.1.4 Diahui 4.1.5 Tenharim 4.2 Population 4.2.1Torá 4.2.2 Pirahã 4.2.3 Parintintín 4.2.4 Diahui 4.2.5 Tenharim 4.3 Religion 4.3.1 Torá 4.3.2 Pirahã 4.3.3 Parintintín 4.3.4 Diahui 4.3.5 Tenharim 4.4 Education 4.4.1 Torá 4.4.2 Pirahã 4.4.3 Tenharim 5 Social relations 5.1 Interaction with Brazilians 5.1.1 Torá 5.1.2 Pirahã

iii iv

5.1.3 Parintintín 5.1.4 Diahui 5.1.5 Tenharim 5.2 Interaction with indigenous people from other locations 5.2.1 Torá 5.2.2 Pirahã 5.2.3 Parintintín 5.2.4 Diahui 5.2.5 Tenharim 6 Language vitality 6.1 Torá 6.2 Pirahã 6.3 Parintintín 6.4 Diahui 6.5 Tenharim 7 Anthropological observations 7.1 Torá 7.2 Pirahã 7.3 Kagwahiva 7.4 Parintintín 7.5 Tenharim 8 Conclusions References

1 Introduction

In October and November 2009, Stan Anonby and Luiz da Silva visited over twenty villages in the southern part of Amazonas state in Brazil. We were interested in surveying the sociolinguistic and cultural vitality of five ethnic groups in the area. The groups in focus were the Parintintín, Diahui, and Tenharim (these three all call themselves Kagwahiva, and speak the same language). In addition, we visited their neighbours, the Torá and Pirahã.

1.1 Purpose and methodology

The southern part of the Brazilian state of Amazonas is home to many indigenous peoples. This survey was conducted for SIL International (SIL) for the purpose of obtaining linguistic and sociolinguistic information on languages in the region. There were several topics of particular interest: • language relationships and ethnolinguistic vitality • impact of bilingual education programs • the need and viability of language development programs

The methodology used was simple: We asked questions about language use patterns and made observations about their language use.

1 2

Map. Locations where ethno-linguistic groups live

1.2 Languages

The primary criteria for inclusion in this report is that a language is spoken in an area bounded by the Marmelos and Madeira rivers. The region forms a rough triangle between these two large waterways that flow north and converge. The Madeira River forms the western border and the Marmelos the eastern one. The southern limit is more or less the Trans-Amazon Highway, which runs east-west between these rivers. The languages discussed in this survey are as follows; presented with the Portuguese spelling and the ISO 639-3 language code in parenthesis:

 Isolates  Torá (trz)  Pirahã (myp)

 Tupi-Guarani language family  Parintintín (pah)  Diahui (pah)  Tenharim (pah)

The last three groups speak the Kagwahiva language. Presently, the surviving Kagwahiva groups are the Diahui, Tenharim, Parintintín, Juma, Uru-eu-wau-wau, Uru-pa-in, Jupaú, Amondawa, Karipuna, and likely several uncontacted groups.1 On survey, we only visited the areas of the first three. The presentation of each group in this report is as follows. First, the two linguistic isolates – the Torá and Pirahã – will be discussed. Then I will look at the three Kagwahiva languages – the Parintintín, Tenharim, and Diahui. We will begin describing the westernmost of these three groups and proceed eastward on the Trans-Amazon highway.

1.3 Geography

The Marmelos, Madeira, and Maici rivers area are located on the Amazon plain, a flat area prone to flooding in the rainy season. Rains last from November to March, causing the water level in rivers and streams to rise considerably. The mighty Madeira River flows for 3,250 kilometres before it enters the Amazon. The 212 kilometre long Marmelos River is a major tributary. The Maici in turn flows over 100 kilometres until it empties into the Marmelos. The area covered will be roughly from the Trans-Amazon highway in the south to the point where the Madeira and Marmelos rivers converge, 200 kilometres to the north. In particular the paper will concentrate on the indigenous reserves. In times past the only transportation routes were the rivers. Today, as in much of the southern Amazon, roads have become more important. In the area in question the only road is the Trans-Amazon Highway, an unpaved route that is sometimes impassable in the rainy season. Not surprisingly, the main municipality in the region is the city of Humaitá, where the Trans-Amazon and the mighty Maderia River converge. The city is located in the far south of Amazonas state, and to the southwest of the area discussed in this paper.

1 In 1930, Garcia de Freitas of the Brazilian Indian Protection Service (SPI) attempted to contact the Diahui (or Jiahui). Instead, he mistakenly attracted another Kagwahiva group, the Pa In. Freitas tried unsuccessfully to stop the Pa In from warring with the Diahui. But when he returned to the rendezvous point, he was only able to find eight people (Garcia de Freitas 1930, in Peggion 2002). Peggion (1999a) stated that some of the Tenharim had worked in the surrounding ranches. The commercial agriculture in the area seemed to be in decline, with many abandoned buildings. 4

1.4 Population distribution

1.4.1 Torá

The Torá are the northernmost group. Their communities are high on the banks of the Marmelos River, near where it joins the Madeira. The Torá villages are all a few miles from the town of Auxiliadora. They also travel downriver to the city of Manicoré. Less frequently, they go up the Madeira River to the regional centre of Humaitá.

1.4.2 Pirahã

The Pirahã originally occupied a stretch of the Marmelos River between Estirão (now a Tenharim village) and the Sepoti River (Gonçalves 2000). They also inhabited the entire length of the Maici River, a large tributary of the Marmelos. They have retained only the latter territory. Today their reserve covers much of the Maici River basin, from its mouth to a couple of kilometres south of the Trans-Amazon. The Pirahã’s territory is between the Parintintín and the Tenharim. The ones who live far downriver relate and travel more to Auxiliadora. The Pirahã who live near the highway are more likely to visit Humaitá.

1.4.3 Parintintín

The Parintintín live in two villages a few miles off the Trans-Amazon highway, in a reserve called 9 de Janeiro. There is a third village one day’s boat ride down the Ipixuna River. Of all the ethnic groups discussed in this paper, the Parintintín live furthest west, and closest to the city of Humaitá, where the highway begins.

1.4.4 Diahui

The Diahui live in two villages on the Trans-Amazon highway, west of the Tenharim and east of the Parintintín.

1.4.5 Tenharim

The core group of Tenharim lives in Marmelos village, where the Trans-Amazon highway crosses the Marmelos River. Lately many new villages have split off from this main one. Most of the new villages are on the highway east of Marmelos. There is one village at least two days down the Marmelos River. This village, called Estirão, is much nearer the town of Auxiliadora. The reserve is called Sepoti. The third group of Tenharim lives in the Igarapé Preto area, 150 kilometres southeast of Marmelos village. These Tenharim live in a savanna, as opposed to the rest, who live in the forest. There is a poor road from Marmelos to Igarapé Preto, and it takes several hours to get there. There is evidence of another Tenharim group living near the headwaters of the Marmelos. These people are periodically spotted several miles south of the Trans-Amazon highway. When the Tenharim go on their yearly expeditions to their Brazil nut groves, they often see human tracks on their trails. The Tenharim call these uncontacted people Morerebi or Karipuna.

2 Previous scholarship

2.1 Torá

There has not been any in depth study of the Torá. Brief references are found in historical documents of the Madeira River region. They are mentioned in Curt Nimuendajú’s article "As Tribos do Alto Madeira" 5

(1925), and in a book called “Cruz Indígena” by Alípio Bandeira (1926). They appear in a 1981 survey by Ezequias Heringer and Ana Lange.2 In 1987 Cartagenes and Lobato describe them in an article, “Agora todo mundo quer ser caboclo” [Now everybody wants to be Brazilian]. In 1999 Edmundo Peggion of the University of Sao Paulo published an article touching on Torá history and anthropology in the online Enciclopedia Povos Indígenas no Brasil.

2.2 Pirahã

Curt Nimuendajú wrote an article on the Pirahã that was published in the Smithsonian’s Handbook of South American Indians in 1948. Today’s foremost scholar on Pirahã is Dan Everett, who began writing (primarily linguistic) papers on the language in 1980.

2.3 Parintintín

In 1924, anthropologist Curt Nimuendajú made the first scholarly mention of the Parintintín (as all the Kagwahiva groups were then known). Over the past 30 years, Waud Kracke, from the University of Chicago, has written on the topics of Parintintín leadership and dreams. In 1981 SIL member LaVera Betts compiled a Parintintín-Portuguese dictionary.

2.4 Diahui

In 1959 Vítor Hugo wrote two tomes about the history of the general area where the Diahui live. Ednelson Pereira wrote an article in 1998 outlining the history of the people. In 2002, Edmundo Peggion of the University of Sao Paulo published an anthropological article on the Diahui in the online Enciclopedia Povos Indígenas no Brasil (Peggion 2002).

2.5 Tenharim

In the 1980s, Miguel Menendez wrote several anthropological articles on the Tenharim. Edmundo Peggion wrote his 1966 thesis about their kinship patterns. In 1997, Wany Sampaio compared two Kagwahiva dialects, Tenharim and Amondawa.

3 History

3.1 Torá

Several Torá said they came from the Rio Negro area. They told us their ancestors had been brought to the vicinity of the Marmelos and Madeira rivers for the purpose of gathering rubber. Some asked if I had run across Torá in other regions of Brazil. The skimpy historical records do not appear to bear this out. In 1690, Father João Betendorf wrote about the “Torerizes” living on the right banks of the Madeira River (Menéndez 1981/82:313 in Peggion 1999b). There are subsequent accounts of the Torá attacking merchants and missions all along the river, from present day Porto Velho to its mouth on the Amazon. By the 18th century the Torá were being heavily castigated by “punitive expeditions.” Massacres over the next hundred years reduced them to a fraction of their former numbers and territory. The survivors went into hiding, moved to missions, or were enslaved (Peggion 1999b). By the beginning of the 20th century the remaining Torá were living where they do today and were almost extinct as a people.

2 Levantamento das Populações Indígenas do Médio Madeira [Survey of the Indigenous Populations of the Mid Madeira]. 6

Around the 1920s, with pacification of the Parintintín, the Madeira River was opened up for settlement (Peggion 1999b). The few Torá that were left intermarried with the Brazilian settlers and rubber tappers and nearly lost their ethnic identity. Perhaps this is where the notion of their Rio Negro ancestry arose. In the 1990s, there was a resurgence of Torá pride. They lobbied and got their own reservation in 2004. The Torá hoped this would entice their relatives who had moved to the cities to return to the land. Although we did see some evidence of this trend, there seemed to be more emigration than immigration.

3.2 Pirahã

The Pirahã were once part of a larger Indian group called the Mura. By the time the Portuguese first encountered them in 1714, they had split into two groups (Everett in Colapinto 2006). The Mura took the path to assimilation, and their language is believed to be extinct. The Pirahã, however, chose to remain more isolated. In 1921, famed anthropologist Curt Nimuendajú briefly studied the Pirahã. He visited two villages – one on the lower Maici and the other on the Marmelos (now the Tenharim village of Estirão). He noted that they showed “little interest in the advantages of civilization” and displayed “almost no signs of permanent contact with civilized people.” He also said they were very pacific, and let themselves be abused by outsider Brazilian nationals (“Brazilians”). (1982a:117, in Gonçalves 2000). Around that time, the Indian Protection Agency opened a post in the lower Maici specifically to assist the Pirahã. Today most Pirahã continue to live on the Maici River, between the Trans-Amazon and the Marmelos. They have increasing contact with the surrounding society, yet remain very resistant to any change.

3.3 Kagwahiva

Kagwahiva is the cover term for the Parintintín, Diahui and Tenharim. Originally, the three groups likely lived nearer to the Atlantic, in northeastern Brazil. Linguistically, their language is phonetically similar to Urubu, spoken in the coastal Brazilian state of Maranhão. The legends of the Kagwahiva speaking groups in the Amazon tell of journeying from a land without water (possibly the dry northeast of Brazil), and traversing a river so wide it took two days to cross (the lower Amazon). These two pieces of evidence suggest the Kagwahiva were originally from the Atlantic coast (Kracke 2005). The earliest written references place the Kagwahiva speaking people, around 1750, in the upper Juruena River, a tributary of the Tapajos (Peggion 1999a). In 1797, Martius records the “Cabahyba” as living 600 kilometres southeast of where they are now in what is now Mato Grosso state, at the confluence of the Arinos and Juruena (Nimuendajú 1924 in Kracke 2005). In the mid 19th century, likely under pressure from the Munduruku and Brazilian gold miners, the Kagwahiva broke into smaller groups and migrated westward (Menéndez 1989:38 in Peggion 2002). By 1816 they had reached the Madeira River. The Kagwahiva groups were likely organized by a family leader. They were unstable. Alliances and splits were commonplace. Each faction came to occupy a territory within the vast region between the upper Madeira and the Tapajós rivers. Though periodically at war with each other, there was some recognition of themselves as a single society (Peggion 1999a). In 1938, the famed anthropologist Claude Lévi-Strauss spent two weeks among the “Tupí Cawahíb” (1961:313–356). The faction he visited was on the Ji-Parana River, roughly where the Uru-pa-in now live. Lévi-Strauss’ impression was the Kagwahiva were a broken people, on their way to assimilation. This has not occurred. Most groups have retained their identity and are increasing numerically.

3.4 Parintintín

In 1817 the Kagwahiva along the Madeira River began to be referred to as Parintintín (possibly a Munduruku word) (Kracke 2005). For a few decades, both terms seemed to be used interchangeably. After 1850 people began to refer to all Kagwahiva as Parintintín. 7

Around that time war broke out with the Brazilians. For some seventy years the Parintintín were able to maintain control over 400 kilometres of the Madeira River (Kracke 2005). There are several accounts of their attacks. In 1874 the Parintintín were famous enough to fire the imagination of Americans like writer Charles Stephens. He tells a story of traveling up the Madeira for seven days and being attacked with arrows by the Parintintín (1874:160–166). The group was finally pacified in 1922–1923 by an expedition led by Curt Nimuendajú. Rubber hunters soon came to control much of the area. It was only then that people realized the Parintintín called themselves “Kagwahiva.” It gradually became evident that the Parintintín were merely one of several Kagwahiva peoples (Peggion 1999a). As in much of Brazil, identity seemed not to be fixed and long lasting. Rather, family groups would frequently merge and break away from each other. Today most of the Parintintín are in two villages just off the Trans-Amazon. They live very near the city of Humaitá, and have a home where they stay in the city.

3.5 Diahui

Until the 1970s most Diahui lived in the forest and had only intermittent contact with Brazilian nut gatherers. In the 1970s their lands were cut in half by the Trans-Amazon highway. They also faced increasing harassment by employees of the tin mining company and by the Tenharim. The Diahui were eventually persuaded to move to the Tenharim village Marmelos. By that time only seven remained. By the mid-1990s, the Diahui didn’t want to live among the Tenharim anymore. In 1999 they broke away and built a village on their traditional land (Peggion 2002). They lobbied and eventually got their own reservation in 2004. Like the Torá, the Diahui hoped their relatives in the cities would return.

3.6 Tenharim

By the 1850s there was a Kagwahiva group, called the Tenharim, living in a village on the upper Madeira River. Their economic base was much the same as local Brazilians. They exchanged rubber, Brazil nuts, and food from their gardens for manufactured goods provided by riverboat traders. In the 1940s two Tenharim women married Brazilians and moved down to the mouth of the Sepoti River. The community grew and moved further downriver to Estirão (former Piraha territory), closer to the town of Auxiliadora (Peggion 1999a:472, in Povos Indígenas 1999:472). In the 1970s the Brazilian government built the Trans-Amazon Highway through Tenharim territory. Shortly thereafter the Tenharim on the upper Marmelos moved their village to the point where the highway crossed the river (Peggion 1994 in Povos Indígenas 1996:374). The Marmelos people were allied with a small Kagwahiva group living to the southeast in Igarapé Preto. In the 1950s miners began arriving to work the tin deposits discovered in the area. When the Trans-Amazon was finished, the trickle became a flood. Shortly thereafter, a new road, called the “tin highway” was built connecting the Trans-Amazon with Rondonia state. The tin highway resulted in a massive influx of farmers and ranchers, too. Many Tenharim gave up their traditional hunting, fishing, and farming, and began to work as farm hands and miners. During the heat of the boom, the mining company actually built a village for the Tenharim (Peggion 1999a). Today farming, ranching, and mining continue on a reduced scale.

4 Social factors relevant to the sociolinguistic environment

4.1 Economy

Harbert (2011) writes that people eventually give up languages they deem to be economically irrelevant. Coulmas (1992:221–222) explains how the high “economic viability” of a language gives it value. Grenoble and Whaley (1998, cited in Harbert 2011) show that languages with high value tend to be used. Dobrin and Berson (2011:199) mention how ethnic groups have a tendency to give up their language in order to better integrate into dominant economic spheres. 8

So, one way to look at the ethnolinguistic vitality of a language is to see to what degree they depend on the market economy. Generally, the more an ethnic groups is connected to the outside world economically, the weaker their language will be.

4.1.1 Torá

The Torá in the villages live the same yearly economic cycles as the surrounding river-dwelling Brazilians. They grow a lot of their own food in gardens, fish, hunt, collect Brazil nuts, and make manioc flour. In some villages they fire bricks for use and for sale. Other Torá work and/or live in the town of Auxiliadora. We met some who were masons, sawmill workers, and teachers. On the whole, the Torá gave the impression of being hardworking and self-sufficient. Since they share the same lifestyle as the Brazilians, it is not surprising that they share the same language.

4.1.2 Pirahã

In contrast to the other groups, the Pirahã have very little involvement in the cash economy. They subsist primarily by fishing and making gardens, which are smaller than those of the surrounding ethnic groups. The Tenharim said it was the Pirahã children who took care of the garden. Everett says it this way, “The stuff that’s growing in this village was either planted by somebody else or it’s what grows when you spit the seed out” (cited in Colapinto 2006). Their other economic activities include hunting and gathering (Gonçalves 2000). Up until a few years ago the riverboats would frequently come up the Maici to trade with the Pirahã. Their primary interest was Brazil nuts, which were often exchanged for alcohol. Today, the Pirahã sometimes travel down to Auxiliadora to trade. We also witnessed them at a store on the Trans- Amazon with strings of fish that they exchanged for goods. It appears that the Pirahã are not becoming involved in the cash economy that surrounds them and are opting to remain in living their traditional lifestyle. They have evidently chosen this course for a long time. In 1921 famed anthropologist Curt Nimuendajú briefly studied the Pirahã. He noted that they showed “little interest in the advantages of civilization (1982a:117, cited in Gonçalves 2000). Dan Everett, who worked on the Pirahã language since the 1980s, also writes about their disinterest in the market economy (Colapinto 2006). As long as they choose to isolate their economy from the forces of the global markets, the Pirahã language is likely to remain strong.

4.1.3 Parintintín

Anthropologist Waud Kracke noted many Parintintín work in the logging industry. Some men are employed maintaining the highway, and some women work as maids in Humaitá and Porto Velho. Many work for the Brazilian department of Indigenous affairs (FUNAI) or as boatmen or cooks on the Madeira River (Kracke 2005). We met some who were employed by the Tenharim. A good percentage of the Parintintín continue to plant gardens and live off the land. Whether they work as loggers, maids, cooks, clerks, or boatmen, their employers are invariably Brazilians. The Parintintín economy is dominated by Portuguese speakers. If the trend toward more and more outside employment continues, this group is likely to speak more and more Portuguese and less and less Parintintín as the years go by.

4.1.4 Diahui

The Diahui hunt, fish, and have gardens around their villages. They gather and sell Brazil nuts and açaí in Humaitá. The women also sell necklaces, rings, bracelets, and feather headdresses (Peggion 2002). Since the Trans-Amazon runs through their reserve, the Diahui also collect tolls. As with the Tenharim, this road tax likely brings them into more contact with Brazilians and accelerates their language shift to Portuguese. 9

4.1.5 Tenharim

Traditionally, the Tenharim lived much the same way as the Torá, gardening, hunting, fishing, and collecting Brazil nuts. Until a few decades ago they also tapped rubber trees. Many continue to garden, make large amounts of manioc flour, and sell their excess produce in Humaitá. Today, the Tenharim on the Trans-Amazon have a new way to make money. They told us they make most of their income come from charging a toll to all vehicles passing through. Each village takes a turn manning the tollbooth. With this money, they are able to hire outsiders to do jobs such as clearing brush, building houses, and making boats. We witnessed cases of Brazilians working for the Tenharim, or asking for jobs. Judging by the size of their homes, the Tenharim in Igarapé Preto seemed to be better off than their kinsmen on the Trans-Amazon. They had a weigh station outside the village and they charged the miners 13% of the mining profits. Several expressed concern that the tin ore was being exhausted. The Tenharim of Estirão have yet another way of making money. They entered into a partnership with Ng Turismo, a sports fishing company. We were told the Tenharim charge Ng Turismo 3,000 reals ($1,500) per boat. These three new ways of making money, in the three different reserves, have aspects in common. They are all basically taxes on the Brazilians, or rent for the use of reserve land, mineral rights, or river. With the change in lifestyle, a change in language is likely. This is because Portuguese is essential to the new economy, and not merely to exact the tolls. Because of the new order there are more Brazilians than ever passing through and staying on reserve land. In the future this trend will likely lead to more interaction with outsiders, intermarriage, and a speedier adoption of the Portuguese language.

4.2 Population

All the groups described in this paper had far higher populations at one time. The majority died after being subjected to European diseases. As a rough estimate the year 1970 marked their lowest point. Today, judging from the numbers of children in the villages, all the ethnic groups are growing very quickly. Peggion (1999a) concurs, by reporting that 58% of the Tenharim were under 16 years old.

4.2.1 Torá

Since there are no longer any speakers of the language, the population increase or decrease of the Torá has no bearing on language vitality. There are various estimates of the Torá population, ranging from 50 (Peggion 1999b) to 312 (FUNASA 2006 [Torá]). The variance is likely partly due to ambivalence as to who is really Torá. In our interviews in the villages of Panorama, Fortaleza, Baixo Grande, and São José, we came up with the following populations:

Panorama (100+ including all ethnic groups) 25 Fortaleza 11 Baixo Grande 75 São José (60+ including all ethnic groups) 22 Total 133

4.2.2 Pirahã

Due to their nomadic customs, it is probably safer to talk about Pirahã population than Pirahã villages. I have used the village populations listed by the governmental agency FUNASA as a point of reference, although actual numbers fluctuate greatly throughout the year. Pirahã villages can sustain greater numbers in the dry season because there is less water and hence a higher concentration of fish in what remains of the river….In the rainy season…, villagers distribute themselves by nuclear families, each family occupying its own house. …These rainy season villages are smaller than summer villages, usually consisting of one elderly couple and their adult sons or daughters, along with their spouses and children 10

(Everett 2009:81). FUNASA (2006) lists their population as 389 (in pib.socioambiental.org/en/povo/Pirahã). Given their traditional lifestyle, this lower figure cannot be explained by saying almost half of them have moved to town. As is the case with other indigenous Brazilian populations, the Pirahã are increasing. As long as they continue to live the way their ancestors did, their language will grow stronger as their population rises. This is because, all things being equal, a smaller language is more vulnerable than a larger one. So, based on their population growth, the Pirahã language vitality will continue to be stronger than that of the surrounding language groups.

The 2009 (FUNASA) Pirahã villages and populations are listed as follows:

Forquilha Grande 85 Pereira 18 Piquia 66 Total 169

4.2.3 Parintintín

The highest estimate for the Parintintín population is 284 (FUNASA 2006 in pib.socioambiental.org/en/povo/Parintintín). This likely includes Parintintín living in cities and the villages of other ethnic groups. Most Parintintín villages are quite close to the Brazilian national towns. Their shift to Portuguese has happened at more or less the rates one would expect, given most have remained in their villages and been in contact with outsiders for ninety years. What follows is a breakdown of Parintintín population on their own land, by reserve (9 de Janeiro and Ipixuna) and village (Pupunha, Traíra and Canavial). The figures for 9 do Janeiro are from FUNASA (2009); the figures for Ipixuna are from Leandro, Paes, and dos Santos (2006).

9 de Janeiro Pupunha 60 Traíra 123 Total 183

Ipixuna Canavial 50 Grand Total 233

4.2.4 Diahui

The Diahui have rebounded from a low of seven individuals in the 1970’s to 50 in 2002 (Peggion 1999b) and 88 in 2006 (FUNASA 2006 in pib.socioambiental.org/en/povo/jiahui). Most live outside of their traditional area and have mixed ancestry. If the Diahui remain in urban areas and continue to intermarry with Brazilians, they are likely to keep shifting to Portuguese at a more rapid rate than the surrounding groups. The 2009 FUNASA statistics for the Diahui villages are as follows:

Jui 26 Kwaiari 8 Total 34

4.2.5 Tenharim

As is the case with the Torá, there are several estimates of the Tenharim population. They range from the 1994 figure of 301 (Peggion 1999a) to that of the main chief we interviewed, who claimed there were 1,600 Tenharim. 11

One characteristic of this group is their tendency to divide. For example, in 1994 the Marmelos reserve had only one village. The increase probably has several root causes. First is simply the population increase. Second, it seems to be a reversion to the way things used to be. Originally, Tenharim communities were family units. We visited these new villages and found the same situation. Third, there are government benefits that each village is entitled to, such as a school and health services. When you divide the village, you double the number of people eligible to be on the government payroll. A look at the map seems to indicate that the proliferation of Tenharim villages, may, in the end, weaken the language. Some of the most peripheral villages, those farthest from the main village Marmelos, are mostly Portuguese speaking. This may be because they are the closest to the Brazilian towns. The trend may be for language shift to begin in these peripheral villages, and work its way along the Trans-Amazon Highway until it reaches the core Tenharim area of Marmelos. What follows is a breakdown of Tenharim population by reserve and village. Unless noted, figures are from FUNASA 2009.

Marmelos Bela Vista 36 Campinho 86 Takwaravy 80 (personal estimate – new village) Caranai 11 Castanheira 18 Mafui 44 Marmelos 253 Taboca 24 Vila Nova 43 Total 595

Igarapé Preto Água Azul 20 Igarapé Preto 66 Total 86

Sepoti (Estirão) Estirão 65 (FUNAI 1998 in Povos Indígenas 2006:481) Grand Total 746

4.3 Religion

Some groups are able to maintain their language though they change their spiritual beliefs. Others keep their old beliefs, yet suffer language shift. Frequently though, people who keep their traditional religions keep their languages as well. Examples of this include the Fulniô of Brazil (Anonby, forthcoming), the Iban of Borneo (Coluzzi 2010), and the Kalash of Pakistan (Faizi 2009). North American examples of people who have kept their religious beliefs along with their languages, are the Pueblo groups (Sutton 2009), Ultra-Orthodox Jews (Fishman 2001) and the Amish (Keiser 2009). Likewise, the demise of the traditional religion seems to go hand in hand with the loss of culture and language. Examples of this include indigenous people of Nepal (Borchers 2009), the Lun Bawang and the Serus of Borneo (Coluzzi 2010), and the Muslim Kalash of Pakistan (Faizi 2009). In the case of the languages in this report, the general trend seems to be that as long as the ethnic groups kept their traditional beliefs, their language remained strong. When the people gave up their religion, their language weakened. 12

4.3.1 Torá

There is a strong Pentecostal congregation in Panorama village, a branch of a church in Auxiliadora. In Fortaleza village they said they would like a missionary to come and live with them. We didn’t see any evidence of spiritual life or religion in the other Torá villages.

4.3.2 Pirahã

There have been Christian missionaries working and living with the Pirahã since 1959. They have learned the language and explained the tenets of Christianity. However, up to the present, the Pirahã have maintained their traditional beliefs and their worldview. They see the world in a stratigraphic way: layers of land placed one on top of the other, producing parallel planes which do not physically communicate. The shaman has the ability to visit the various layers (Gonçalves 2000). The Pirahã’s retention of their traditional religion is likely one reason why their sociolinguistic vitality is much stronger than the surrounding ethnic groups.

4.3.3 Parintintín

Many of the Parintintín we talked to claimed to be Catholic. It appeared this meant that they have celebrations in the village for two different saints. However, local people commented that no priests visit the village. Around three times a year a Pentecostal minister comes to the village of Traíra and hold meetings. The Parintintín enjoy playing guitar and singing songs in the service. They seem to use only Portuguese for matters involving the Christian religion. The language of origin is used in their traditional religion, which is now practiced mainly by the older people. For example, only the elders continue to observe the food taboos. The curing rituals that used to be central to the Parintintín culture are no longer practiced (Kracke 2005).

4.3.4 Diahui

The Diahui we spoke to identified with the Pentecostal church in Marmelos. The Portuguese language services likely encourage the Diahui to speak more Portuguese and less of their language.

4.3.5 Tenharim

We didn’t witness much use of the indigenous language in religious services. Brazilian leadership was apparent in all the church gatherings we attended. They were conducted the same way they would be in a non-indigenous community. In the Marmelos Baptist church, they sang a few songs in Tenharim. Although there is an audiovisual series of Bible stories available in Tenharim, we did not hear of anyone using them. There is also the New Testament in Tenharim. The leader of the Marmelos Pentecostal church read the Tenharim Bible along with the Portuguese. The Baptist church building in Marmelos is about 20 years old, and was built by Brazilians from the city of Porto Velho. It seemed that the only time they met was when a team from their “mother church,” the same ones who constructed the building, showed up. We were there during one of those times and there was a large crowd. People told us lately they had only been meeting in church once every other year. A pastor from the small city of Santo Antônio de Matupi comes by a couple of times a month to conduct home meetings. The local people always referred to the town as 180. This was presumably because it is located 180 kilometres to the east of Humaitá, where the Trans-Amazon begins. The pastor from Porto Velho told us that a few years ago they had to have a Tenharim translator whenever they had church service. But now that everyone understands Portuguese that is no longer necessary. This comment indicates how rapidly the Tenharim are becoming bilingual. The youth seemed excited about learning Portuguese Christian songs. We also observed the young people dancing to Brazilian music as 13

they were manning the tollbooth. This may indicate that singing is a domain that is shifting from Tenharim to Portuguese. There is one Pentecostal church in Marmelos and another in Mafui village. Just like the Baptist church, the buildings were constructed by Brazilians. The Tenharim told us they meet twice a month, when a group from 180 arrives. However, when we inspected the building, it looked like it hadn’t been used for a very long time. Because these churches appear non-functional, they likely exert little influence on the language. At the very least, we cannot say the churches along the Trans-Amazon highway are a major influence on the Tenharim to shift to Portuguese. The same cannot be said for the reserves off the Trans-Amazon. Brazilian miners in Igarapé Preto were building a Pentecostal church in the village. Since it is right next door to the mine, there was a lot of interaction between the two groups. There were services every night, and the Tenharim made up the majority of the congregation. While we were there, the church youth were practicing for a Christian musical show. The Brazilians in leadership were training a Tenharim couple to take over the congregation. They planned to take some Tenharim young people to a church youth camp so they could mingle with others from the mother church in the city of Apui. The chief noted positive changes in the community. He said the young people had quit drinking and were now heavily involved in the Pentecostal congregation. So the church in Igarapé Preto seems to be a force that is leading the Tenharim there away from their language and toward integration with Brazilians.

4.4 Education

4.4.1 Torá

The Torá children attended classes, and some villages had their own school. The only language used was Portuguese. There was some talk of revitalizing the language, but no one seemed to have enough memory of Torá to get anywhere with the idea.

4.4.2 Pirahã

We traveled into the Pirahã village with their Munduruku teacher, who was monolingual in Portuguese. Since the Pirahã only speak their language, it is doubtful she is able to teach them successfully. We saw them scribbling circles and lines, but nothing else. The Pirahã’s complete lack of formal education has likely contributed to their retention of their language. Education would likely lead them away from their culture and concomitant language.

4.4.3 Tenharim

In the Marmelos area there were Tenharim schools up to eighth grade. Several of the ethnic groups were attending high school or university in Humaitá. At least one Tenharim was working on her doctorate in medicine. We visited many classrooms, and saw only Portuguese written. Some Tenharim (notably two teachers) read very well in the native language. We tested many others, and they all read much better in Portuguese. It appears that education is leading the people away from the language and the culture. Igarapé Preto hasn’t had a functioning school for four years. Nobody in the village expressed concern about that. In spite of the absence of education in Portuguese, the people were losing their language at a faster rate than their relatives in Marmelos. 14

5 Social relations

5.1 Interaction with Brazilians

5.1.1 Torá

The Torá have a lot of interaction with Brazilians. They trade their Brazil nuts, manioc flour, and fish with the owners of the merchant boats. Several Torá – including teachers and chiefs – live within the town of Auxiliadora. Their presence in the town is so commonplace, many townspeople did not even know which neighbours were Torá. Given this high level of acculturation, it seems difficult to even speak coherently about them as a distinct people.

5.1.2 Pirahã

Up until a few years ago, Brazilian national peddlers would frequently come up the Maici River, where the Pirahã live, in their boats. Some even settled temporarily on the river to exploit the Brazil nut groves (Gonçalves 2000). We were told deadly fights would erupt among the Pirahã as a result of trading alcohol for Brazil nuts. Peggion (Povos Indígenas 1999:475) graphically describes this problem. Today, FUNAI and the NGO Conselho Indigenista Missionário (CIMI) keep non-Pirahã out of the reserve. Downriver in Auxiliadora, there is a CIMI employee who helps the Pirahã interface with the townspeople. Upriver at the Trans-Amazon, there is a store where the Pirahã trade fish for cookies and flour. Although many Pirahã visit Humaitá for medical treatment, there is only one who lives in the city. He is actually half Pirahã, and is married to a Munduruku. We noted his family was not well accepted by neighbours. Since travel into their area has been restricted, the Pirahã have less interaction with Brazilians now than in the past. If this remains the case, there will be little risk of their language weakening in the future. The Pirahã will remain the group with the strongest cultural vitality in the region.

5.1.3 Parintintín

Since the Parintintín live so near Humaitá, there is a lot of travel back and forth between their villages and the city. The Parintintín own a house in town, which they use when visiting or needing to see the doctor. These regular incursions to the city are likely contributing to the loss of their language and culture.

5.1.4 Diahui

Peggion (2002) notes when the Diahui lands were occupied by ranchers, many of the villagers moved to the nearby cities. There, they quickly assimilated and preferred to be identified as non-indigenous. The Diahui we met in the villages were married to Brazilians. Because they became urbanized, intermarried, and assimilated, their rate of language shift to Portuguese was much more rapid than that of the surrounding ethnic groups.

5.1.5 Tenharim

The Tenharim in Estirão are married to local Brazilians. This, plus their location on the navigable portion of the Marmelos River, lends itself to a good interaction between the groups. This leads to their speaking much more Portuguese than other Tenharim. The relationship between the Tenharim on the Trans-Amazon and the Brazilians was somewhat tense. Several incidents seem to illustrate these bad feelings. For example, recently the Tenharim had 15

reported illegal logging on the reserve. One of the chiefs thought a logger had hired us to kill him. The motorists we spoke with expressed resentment at having to pay a toll to drive through the reserve. The Tenharim have also fought with Brazilians who come onto the reserve to harvest turtle eggs (Peggion 1994 in Povos Indígenas 1996:373). In 1991, there was an incident where a trucker picked up a couple of Tenharim hitchhikers. As he neared the village, he rolled the truck and the two Tenharim (along with another Brazilian) were crushed. The villagers formed a mob and beat the trucker to death (Estado de Minas 04/01/91 in Povos Indígenas 1996:377). There were also indications of peaceful co-existence in Marmelos. We saw Brazilians approaching the Tenharim for jobs. Several of the Tenharim men we met were married to white women. Whether tense or smooth, the relationship between the two groups seems to be leading to more Portuguese language use and less Tenharim being spoken on the Trans-Amazon Highway. According to Peggion (1999a), the Tenharim of Igarapé Preto were exploited by miners for many years. Today, however, the two groups appear to interact more as equals. The mining settlement is less than a kilometre from the village, and we noted the two groups socializing frequently. For example, joint church services were held both in the mining camp and on the reserve. The miners interact with the ethnic people in order to export their tin ore. We didn’t hear of any cases of mixed marriages. These partnerships – religious and economic – are leading the people of Igarapé Preto away from the Tenharim language. There is a Tenharim house in the city of Humaitá, used mainly for people seeking medical treatment. It almost looks like a jail. The Tenharim are kept under guard by the department of Indian affairs, FUNAI, and only allowed outside for a specific purpose. Presumably this is part of an effort to stop the people from assimilating and losing their language and culture. On the other hand, there are several Tenharim who are taking high school or university studies in Humaitá. This would seem to lead in the opposite direction. Most people who complete university do not return to the reserve, and their families eventually stop speaking Tenharim. With the exception of some hostility along the Trans-Amazon highway, most of the relationships with Brazilians were positive. These attitudes may well be a harbinger of further language shift.

5.2 Interaction with indigenous people from other locations

5.2.1 Torá

The Torá live in four villages. In two of them they are a minority, apparently living harmoniously alongside other indigenous people – Apurinã, Munduruku, and Parintintín. They interact in the only language they have in common – Portuguese.

5.2.2 Pirahã

On account of the language barrier, the indigenous people on the Trans-Amazon had little to do with the Pirahã. Even their Munduruku teacher made a clear effort to distance herself from them physically. Downstream, the Torá told us they traded Brazil nuts with the Pirahã. Their minimal interaction with other natives is a factor that keeps the Pirahã language and culture stronger than that of the surrounding groups.

5.2.3 Parintintín

The Parintintín seemed rather widely dispersed among other indigenous people in the area. We met some in Torá and Tenharim villages. This tendency to move has created more need for the Parintintín to speak in Portuguese. 16

5.2.4 Diahui

After their numbers were reduced to single digits, many surviving Diahui went to live with the Tenharim. In the 1990s tension between the two groups escalated and the Diahui went back to their traditional land (Peggion 2002). Because they have moved away from a large ethnic group that speaks a different language, they probably have even less reason to speak their language of origin today. Since they no longer live with the Tenharim they will likely continue shifting to Portuguese at a more rapid rate than other groups.

5.2.5 Tenharim

We did not see much evidence of other indigenous people on the Tenharim reserves. Even in town, they stay together in their own building. This propensity to stick together may help the language survive.

6 Language vitality

6.1 Torá

All were monolingual in Portuguese. One chief told us a few Torá words remained. Another said even an elder who was close to 100 years old remembered nothing of the language. One man in his 60s told us his mother spoke Portuguese with an accent, presumably Torá.

6.2 Pirahã

Anthropologist Marco Antonio Gonçalves, who lived with the Pirahã for eighteen months, claims most of the men understand Portuguese (2000). A linguist who worked with the people since 1977 claimed they are monolingual in Pirahã. There seemed to be evidence for both views. On the one hand, we witnessed Brazilians talking to them, and they seemed to understand. On the other hand, we never heard the Pirahã speak Portuguese. When I tried to communicate with them in the national language I did not succeed.

6.3 Parintintín

The older Parintintín told us they knew their language, but we only heard Portuguese spoken.

6.4 Diahui

We heard only Portuguese in the Diahui villages.

6.5 Tenharim

Relying on research done years ago, the anthropologist Peggion described a diglossic situation. “Among the Tenharim of the Marmelos River, the native tongue is spoken within the group and Portuguese in relations with [outsiders]” (1999a). We ran across incidents that make us believe that there is definite domain leakage. We asked mothers what language the infants learned first. They told us the kids first speak Portuguese, then Tenharim. The pastor from Porto Velho told us up to five years ago he used an interpreter in the church services. He also said the young people talk to each other in Portuguese, and switch to Tenharim when an outsider shows up. I observed a fifty-year old leader talking to a large group of young people in Portuguese. They were speaking about how to get into university, which is definitely an outsider domain. There was evidence that schooling on reserve was entirely in Portuguese. The young 17

people speak Portuguese without any accent. We observed children and young people speaking both languages. In the same 1999a article by Peggion, he noted that in Igarapé Preto and Estirão, “the indigenous language has been almost lost.” What we observed and heard confirmed this.

7 Anthropological observations

7.1 Torá

We couldn’t find a single difference between Torá and local Brazilians. Neither the Brazilians nor the Torá could come up with any features that marked them as distinct. The local people couldn’t even tell us which of their neighbours was Torá. Even within the ethnic group there seemed to be some confusion about who was Torá. Peggion (1999b) studied them and concluded their central village was Fortaleza, and their main chief, Máximo. We met the man, and he confirmed this. But when we visited the people in Baixo Grande, a much larger village, they claimed to be Torá too. Other Torá told us Máximo tries to pass himself off as the grand chief, but that he is only the head of his family. In light of the above, it might be more appropriate to talk about people on this part of the Marmelos as having some Torá ancestry. Practically speaking, they belong to the Brazilian river culture, which is an ancient mixture of both lifestyles.

7.2 Pirahã

The Pirahãs lifestyle is far from sedentary. They do not stay in a single place permanently. Rather, there are between five and fifteen different Pirahã villages along the Maici River, depending on the season (Gonçalves 2000). The Pirahã are famous for living life on their own terms. Everett calls them “the most powerful culture of the Amazon” (Colapinto 2006). What I observed clearly confirmed this. For example, the Pirahã don’t use guns and fishing line – only bows and arrows. There are very few store bought goods in their villages. They don’t use money. They showed little interest in my presence, but rather stayed up late into the night laughing and shouting. Their gardens are small and unkempt. Everett sums it up this way, “Nobody has resisted change like this in the history of the Amazon, and maybe of the world” (Colapinto 2006). As long as the Pirahã continue to live their nomadic lifestyle, their language will likely remain stronger than the surrounding groups.

7.3 Kagwahiva

The Tenharim, Parintintín and Diahui all call themselves “Kagwahiva.” The term is translated "our people," as opposed to “Tapy'yn,” which means "enemy" (Kracke 2005). Throughout the years, splits have been common and unions have been unstable. It can be assumed group boundaries were constantly shifting owing to splits, mergers, and skirmishes (Peggion 2002). Contact with the Brazilian government and setting up of reserves fossilized that fluid state somewhat. Traditionally, Kagwahiva villages consisted of a single communal house called an ongá (Kracke 2005). Today, all live in nuclear dwellings up on stilts, the same way local Brazilians do. Lately the Kagwahiva groups have been joining together in feasts. The most important of those celebrations is called Mboatava (Peggion 1999a). We heard a lot about an upcoming marriage feast all the Kagwahiva villages were invited to.

7.4 Parintintín

Although the language is growing weaker, there may be other Parintintín cultural markers gaining strength. For instance, in 2005 they held an Irerua, or warrior feast, for the first time in 60 years. The elders taught the youth how to prepare the right body paint, clothing, food, and dances. Various non- governmental organizations and FUNAI sponsored the event (Giselle Lucena 04/09/05 in Ricardo 18

2006:494). So, the Parintintín may be choosing to maintain their identity through rituals, rather than through their language.

7.5 Tenharim

The Tenharim exhibited behaviour that indicated interest in Brazilian national society. For instance, in Marmelos we witnessed a crowd of stylish youth, many with dyed hair combed in a Mohawk, listening to loud rock music. In Brazil, this trend tends to lead away from the native culture and language.

8 Conclusions

One factor pertaining to sociolinguistic vitality is how long the people have had contact with Brazilian national society. Generally, the longer they have interacted with the dominant society, the greater the level of assimilation. If we listed the ethnic groups, beginning with the ones that entered into contact with Brazilians first, it would be as follows: Torá, Pirahã, Parintintín, Tenharim, and Diahui. If we ranked the sociolinguistic and cultural vitality of the groups, beginning with the least vital, we would expect the list to be the same as the one in the preceding paragraph. It is not, however. Rather, the list of strongest to weakest vitality is as follows: Pirahã, Parintintín, Tenharim, Diahui, and Torá. In three of the groups, the Tenharim, Parintintín, and Torá, the levels of acculturation and language loss are more or less what we would expect. The vitality of these cultures and languages varies according to the date they came into contact with Brazilians. The later they came into contact, the stronger their original language and culture. Two of the groups are anomalous. The Diahui were the last people to come into contact with Brazilians, so one would expect their language to be the strongest. However, it is second weakest. The explanation for this is most likely their low population. After contact, their numbers were reduced to just seven individuals. With so few people, they had little choice but to marry outside their ethnic group. Some found Brazilian national spouses, which weakened the chances of passing Diahui culture and language onto the next generation. The Pirahã were among the first to come into contact with outsiders, so one would expect them to have lost their language of origin by now. It is particularly poignant that their close relatives, the Mura, have almost completely assimilated to the national language and culture. Nevertheless, of all the groups, the Pirahã have the strongest sociolinguistic and cultural vitality. The explanation for this must have something to do with their primary culture, which is strongly resistant to change.

References

Anonby, Stan. Forthcoming. A report on Fulniô language maintenance. Ms. Bandeira, Alípio. 1926. A cruz indigena. Porto Alegre: Livraria Globo. Betts, VaVera. 1981. Dicionário Parintintín-Português-Parintintín. Brasília: Summer Institute of Linguistics. Borchers, Dörte. 2009. The career of endangered languages in Nepal’s young democracy. In Hakim Elnazarov and Nicholas Ostler eds., Endangered languages and history: Proceedings of the thirteenth FEL conference, 72–79. Bath: Foundation for Endangered Languages. Cartagenes, Rosa and João Carlos Lobato. 1987. Agora todo mundo quer ser caboclo. In Carlos Alberto Ricardo ed., Povos indígenas no Brasil 1987/1990. São Paulo: ISA. Colapinto, John. 2006. Accessed December 14, 2009. http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2007/04/16/070416fa_fact_colapinto. Coluzzi, Paolo. 2010. Endangered languages in Borneo: A survey among the Iban and Murut (Lun Bawang) in Temburong, Brunei. Oceanic Linguistics 49(1):119–143. Coulmas, Florian. 1992. Language and economy. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers. Dobrin, Lise, and Josh Berson. 2011. Speakers and language documentation. In Peter Austin and Julia Sallabank eds., The Cambridge handbook of endangered languages, 187–211. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Everett, Daniel L. 2009. Don’t sleep, there are snakes – life and language in the amazonian jungle. London: Profile Books Ltd. Everyculture.com. n.d. http://www.everyculture.com/South-America/Kagwahiv-History-and-Cultural- Relations.html. Accessed August 29, 2018. Faizi, Inayatullah. 2009. Religion as a tool of social domination: Case study of Kalasha from Chitral, Northwest Pakistan. In Hakim Elnazarov and Nicholas Ostler eds., Endangered languages and history: Proceedings of the Thirteenth FEL Conference, 53–56. Bath: Foundation for Endangered Languages. Fishman, Joshua. 2001. A decade in the life of a two-in-one language: Yiddish in New York City (secular and ultra-orthodox). In Joshua Fishman ed., Can threatened languages be saved?, 74–100. Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters. Fundação Nacional da Saúde (FUNASA). 2006. Juihui. https://pib.socioambiental.org/en/povo/jiahui. Accessed January 29, 2010 (link is not original). Fundação Nacional da Saúde (FUNASA). 2006. Parintintín. https://pib.socioambiental.org/en/povo/parintintín. Accessed January 29, 2010 (link is not original). Fundação Nacional da Saúde (FUNASA). 2006. Pirahã. https://pib.socioambiental.org/en/povo/pirahã. Accessed January 29, 2010 (link is not original). Fundação Nacional da Saúde (FUNASA). 2006. Tenharim. https://pib.socioambiental.org/en/povo/tenharim. Accessed January 29, 2010 (link is not original). Fundação Nacional da Saúde (FUNASA). 2006. Torá. https://pib.socioambiental.org/en/povo/torá. Accessed January 29, 2010 (link is not original). Fundação Nacional da Saúde (FUNASA). 2009. Pólo Base Humaitá. Gonçalves, Marco Antonio. 2000. Pirahã. https://pib.socioambiental.org/en/Povo:Pirahã. Accessed August 29, 2018.

19 20

Harbert, Wayne. 2011. Endangered languages and economic development. In Peter Austin and Julian Sallabank eds., The Cambridge handbook of endangered languages, 403–422. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Hugo, Vitor. 1959. Humaitá: Campo Grande MS: Mission Salesiano. Keiser, Steven. 2009. When “Speech Islands” aren’t islands: Parallel independent development, drift, and minimal levels of contact for diffusion. Diachronica 26(1):1–35. Kracke, Wauld. 2005. Parintintín. Accessed December 12, 2009. http://www.pib.socioambiental.org/en/povo/Parintintín. Leandro, Ederson, Alecilene Paes, and Paulo dos Santos. 2006. Percepção do turismo na etnia Parintintín, terra indígena Ipixuna, Humaitá, Amazonas, Brasil. Accessed February 17, 2010. http://www.physis.org.br/ecouc/Resumos/Resumo237.pdf. Levi-Strauss, Claude, translated by John Russell. 1961. Tristes Tropiques. New York: Athenaeum. Menendez, Miguel Angel. 1981/1982. Uma contribuição para a etno-história da área Tapajós-Madeira. Rev. do Museu Paulista 1981/1982:289–388. Nimuendajú, Curt. 1948. The Mura and Pirahã. In Julian H. Steward ed. Handbook of South American indians. Washington: Smithsonian Institution. Nimuendajú, Curt. 1982a. As tribos do Alto Madeira. In Curt Nimuendajú Textos Indigenistas, 111–122. São Paulo: Loyola. Nimuendajú, Curt. 1982b Os índios Parintintín do rio Madeira In Curt Nimuendajú Textos Indigenistas, 46–110. São Paulo: Loyola. Peggion, Edmundo Antônio. 1994. Tenharim. Povos indígenas 1996:373). Peggion, Edmundo Antônio. 1996. Forma e função: uma etnografia do sistema de parentesco Tenharim. http://repositorio.unicamp.br/jspui/handle/REPOSIP/281113/ Accessed August 29, 2018. Peggion, Edmundo Antônio. 1999a. Tenharim. https://pib.socioambiental.org/en/Povo:Tenharim/ Accessed August 29, 2018. Peggion, Edmundo Antônio. 1999b. Torá. https://pib.socioambiental.org/en/Povo:Torá. Accessed August 29, 2018. Peggion, Edmundo Antônio. 2002. Jiahui. https://pib.socioambiental.org/en/povo/jiahui. Accessed December 10, 2009. Pereira, Ednelson. 1998. Kagwahiva Jahoi: localização histórica e atual. Humaitá: Projeto Humaitá/Opan. Ricardo, Carlos Alberto ed. 1987. Povos indígenas no Brasil 1987/1990. São Paulo: ISA. Ricardo, Carlos Alberto ed. 1995. Povos indígenas no Brasil 1991/1995. Sao Paulo: ISA. Ricardo, Carlos Alberto ed. 2000. Povos indígenas no Brasil 1996/2000. Sao Paulo: ISA. Ricardo, Carlos Alberto ed. 2006. Povos indígenas no Brasil 2001/2005. Sao Paulo: ISA. Sampaio, Wany Bernadete de Araújo. 1997. Estudo comparativo sincrônico entre o Parintintín (Tenharim) e o Uru-eu-wau-wau (Amondawa): contribuições para uma revisão na classificação das línguas tupi- kawahib. Dissertação de Mestrado. Campinas: Unicamp. Stephens, C.A. 1874. On the Amazons, or, the cruise of “The rambler”. Boston: J. R. Osgood. Sutton, Logan. 2009. Kiowa-Tanoan: What’s in the hyphen? In Hakim Elnazarov and Nicholas Ostler eds., Endangered languages and history: Proceedings of the thirteenth FEL conference, 116–123. Bath: Foundation for Endangered Languages.