The Classification of the Bantu Languages of Tanzania
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
i lIMFORIVIATION TO USERS This material was produced from a microfilm copy of the original document. While the most advanced technological means to photograph and reproduce this document h^i(^|eeh used, the quality is heavily dependent upon the quality of the qriginal submitted. ■ The following explanation of techniques is provided to help you understand markings or patterns which may appear on this reproduction. I.The sign or "target" for pages apparently lacking from the document photographed is "Mining Page(s)". IfJt was'possible to obtain the missing page(s) or section, they are^spliced into the film along with adjacent pages. This may have necessitated cutting thru an image and duplicating adjacent pages to insure you'complete continuity. 2. When an.image.on the film is obliterated with li large round black mark, it . is an if}dication that the photographer suspected that the copy may have moved during, exposure and thus cause a blurred image. You will find a good image of the page in the adjacent frame. 3. When a map, drawing' or chart, etc., was part of the material being V- photographed the photographer ' followed a definite method in "sectioning" the material. It is customary to begin photoing at the upper left hand corner of a large sheet and to .continue photoing fronTleft to right in equal sections with a small overlap. If necessary, sectioning is continued, again — beginning below the first row and continuing on until . complete. " - 4. The majority of usefs indicate that the textual content is, of greatest value, ■however, a somewhat higher quality reproduction could be made from .'"photographs" if essential to the understanding of the dissertation. Silver prints of "photo^phs" may be ordered, at additional charge by writing .. / the Order Department, giving the catalog number, title, author and specific pages y^u wish reproduced. V 5. PLEASE NOTE: Some pages may lhave indistinct print. Filmed as >• 5, . received. s- Xerox University Microfilms 300 North Zeeb Road Ann Arbor. Michigan 46106 t u. 76^14,503 •• POLOME, Andre Robert, 1946- THE CLASSIFICATION OF THE BANTU LANGUAGES OF TANZANIA. The University of Texas at Austin, Ph.D • 9 1975 Language, linguistics .5’ * Xerox University Microfilms, Ann Arbor, Micfe#an48io6 a © Copy-right by v-.-i. Andr^ Robert Polome 1975 - \ THIS DISSERTATION HAS BEEN MICROFILMED EXACTLY AS RECEIVED. ; . -X- ; A ■I THE CLASSIFICATION OF THE BANTU LANGUAGES OF TANZANIA ! ; • ' ,'s;. by 'r / ./ \ ANDRE ROBERT POLOME,. B.A., M •tv\ ** i: % o'. DISSERTATION Presented to the Faculty of the Graduate School of The University of Texas at Austin In Partial Fulfillments of the Requirements for the Degree.j.,pf DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPeY r THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS'AT AUSTIN DECEMBER 1975 5 •s \ I i ' I V THE CLASSIFICATION OF THE BANTTJ ■ IJVNGUAGES OF TANZANIA ■■'3. - - * Cjrf O- APPROVED BY SUPERVISORY CO>MITTEE: ' / :■ ' ■ # I 'v •7 To my mother, Julia, and my wife, Susan«irr «-• ■ 0 i / .*• ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would like to express my sincere thanks to the following people; to Dr. Edgar C. Polome^, for supr. plying'the raw data for this study; to Drs. King, Jazay- ' ery,- Blount, and Van Olphen, for their pa'tiepce, 'under standing, and academic counsel during the writing^of.this dissertation—especlal-ly-, to ;Dr. King, for his support .and guidance -throughout my graduate studies, as well as . "his assuming the chairmanship of my Doctoral Committee; ■and to my wife Susan, for typing my dissertation, and.for . • ’.V/l' her patience and understanding during‘its preparation. ■is. « \ 1 «r V \ ■ < THE CLASSIFICATION. OF THE BANTU • ; , LANGUAGES OF TANZANIA • 4,.- '■'i .. Publ'ication No. > -- ., / (• . - ■ Andre Robert -Polome, Ph.i). «>^r The University of Texas at Austin, 1975 1 f Supervising Professor: .Robert D. King . ■ A Using thp/techniques of word-geography and lexlco- statlstlcs, this /dissertation alms at a recla,&slflcatlon of the Bantu languages of Tanzania and at a thorough re vision of Guthrie's zoning of“that area. It builds on the research done on the northern part of the country In the M.A. thesis submitted In 1971 under the title "The Classification^of the Languages of Northern Tanzania." The m^^erlals used are data collected in I969-70 In the Survey'of Language Use and. Language Teaching In Tanzania. They Include: r i a) a-set of 75 sentences.based on. Swadesh's two- / Aundred-word list; b) vocabulary lists of about one thousand words based on the Proto-Bantu reconstructions of Meln- hof, Guthrie, and Meeussen. Vi I ! f i' I The vocabulary items are mapped, and Innovations and conservatism, as reflected by isoglossesare inter preted in connection with the history and sociolinguistic situation of the relevant areas. V y /. > JT c vii » ..'i V'- . i- 'i. J. t' M TABLE OF CONTENTS ■ V * ' ' CHAPTER ... 1. INTRODUCTION...• • • • • • • .... • 1" •' /• 'II. HISTORICAL BACKGROUND ..10, III. PRIOR CLASSIFICATIONS...23.- ✓ Linguistic classifications23. ^Harry H'. Johnston... 2-4. Malcolm Guthrie..... 31. Other classifications..3-6. Non-linguistlc classifications,,..38. IV. METHODOLOGY ^5 •j' Relevant publications..... 45. Methodology employed in this study 63. - . V. DATA AND ANALYSIS '. .71. , VI BORROWING fs. 144. \. Borrowing... 144. Definitions -.144., Conditions 145. 1- ,: Major, types ...,.147. The language situation in Tanzania 151. ^History of Swahili influence...151. Acceptance and .assimilation of borrowings .... 154. vlii i V.J •- «* •A. • Conclusion. ....................159. Vli. CLASSIFICATION AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS i6n. 4 ■ Discussion' of Isogloss maps.....*... 164. ■ ; ■ ___ Ji':-: “ "Tr^^'riBantii'group 165. 166. A :Spll|;' group ■O^earlcut group 171. .Stat e^ent of results . .219. APPENDIX I. ..234. L 239. APPENDIX*11. y .i APPENDIX III 245. a A-pi>ENDIX IV. > 250. APPENDIX V 262. ‘ 'BIBLIOGRAPHY¥ •■t / 264. ^•r -1'>. ■' _■»* r j ■ : A- ■ j* ■4 c> 4 / B lx i. i LIST op ILLUSTRATIONS ‘ Figure I—Main Tribes and Languages.. 9. Figure Hr—Point of^rigin of the Bantu 21. : ^Figure III—The Four Stages of Oliver's Description...22. i i • Figure IV-"Guthrie's Zones 43. Figure V—Language Numbers Assigned in This Study- 44. Figure 'Vl-r-Isogloss Map for ZIZI............229. V - Figure VII—Isogloss Map for, NDEGE 230. Figure VIII--Isogloss Map for PUA 231., Figure IXr—Isogloss Map for JUA 232. , Figure X—Isogloss Map for FIMBO 233. ” d'- , «• . / X •* ; \ \ CHAPTER I—INTRODUCTION A The ultimate goal of this dissertation is the ,classification' of the Bantu languages of Tanzania using the morpho-geographical approach.This is a unique ap- - ^ proach'to the analysis of linguistic data-and is'an adap- tation of the "empirical method" described tty Walrolm . Guthrie in his book. The Glassification of the Bantu Languages (London, 1948). Wha^ we have done here is to X. ' combine the results of the analysis of two of the dif- . ferentia which Guthrie proposes (i.e. lexical and pho- nological), tracing our findings back to the ^starred or Proto-Bantu- forms prior to plotting the isogldsses on maps to determine the actual classification.The other • /. / / three differentia mentioned by Guthrie are grammatical. I phonetical, and tonal; we did not analyze these because the corpus of data available for this- stuc^ was not 1. structured for that type of analysis. The choice of country for study was totally arbitrary, the deciding._factbr being the availability of raw materials for Tanzania.,' Another factor which in • fluenced this choice -is th.e fact that the speakers of the Tanzanian languages are under enormous pressure from the government to learn'Swahili, now the national - - • 1 ' \ 2 language. This condition is favorable to and manifested, in a gradual Increase in borrowings from Swahili, which, over-a period of time, may.result- in linguistic modifi cation’s of the various- borrowing-languages. The primary soTirce of data for this, study is' a ' /• portion of the material's collected in Tanzania by a ;,team, of linguists led by Dr. Edgar C. Polome and sponsored by the Ford Foundation during the. year 1970. The other major sources of Information are Malcolm Guthrie's four . volumes on Comparative Bantu (Farnborough, England, 1967,, 1970, and 1971), A.E. Meeussen's "Bantu Lexical on- . structlons" (Tervuren, 1969), and Carl Meinhof's Intro duction to the Phonology of the Bantu Languages (Berlin, 1932). In this study, we have been able t;o'-“a’nalyze only ninety-three of the one hundred thirteen .languages- and dialects that M.A. Bryan names as,belonging to' the Tan ganyika Territory in, her. book. The Bantu Languages of 2 Africa (London, 195^).This is due solely to the fact that speakers of the twenty reraa.ining languages were not aV’ailahre'fdr U^Sa-'-as infqrmants,. In- spite of this, we believe that this study encompasses probably the largest i, number of languages that has been dealt with in a single ' study (cf. Figure I). Furthermore,,many of the languages included in this study have never before been -shudied or . 3 c- . evenput into written form, In addition, a number of these languages have never before been mentioned in pre 3 viQUS classifications. The major part of this work.depends on the analy- sis of the "root" or "stem" of the lexical item, Theri- fore, the.author feels that a definition of this term should be provided here:'*'a root is a morpheme that underlies an inflectional or derivational paradigm..." ■ ' - 5 or "such^a form reconstructed for a parent language...." It should further be noted that, as a rule, roots in typica^i^ Bantu are monomorphemlc, l.e. the root con- sists of only one morpheme,-a morpheme being defined as "the smallest meaningful unit in a language. Ariother point’that xe would ll"ke to briefly dis- cusshere is that of the problem of orthography.