Laal: an isolate language? - University of California, …linguistics.berkeley.edu/.../Lionnet_FForum_Laal.pdf2010/11/24 · Laal: an isolate language? 12 A. Laal and the neighbouring

Laal: an isolate language?

1

Florian LIONNETFForum, UC Berkeley

24 Nov. 2010


2

INTRODUCTION

Laal is spoken in Southern Chad by ca. 700 people (750 as of 2000 according to the Ethnologue)

Work done on Laal: Boyeldieu 1973/1975 (+publications) My own fieldwork (May/April 2010)


3

INTRODUCTION

Laal is as yet unclassified

Boyeldieu (1982b):

“Its classification remains problematic; while it showscertain common lexical, and no doubt morphological,traits with the Bua languages (Adamawa-13, Niger-Congo family of Joseph H. Greenberg), it differs fromthem radically in many ways of which some, a priori, arereminiscent of geographically nearby Chadiclanguages.”


4

INTRODUCTION

Blench (2003):

“Its vocabulary and morphology seem to be partlydrawn from Chadic (i.e. Afro-Asiatic), partlyfrom Adamawa (i.e. Niger-Congo) and partlyfrom an unknown source, perhaps its originalphylum, a now-vanished grouping from CentralAfrica.”


5

INTRODUCTION

Dimmendaal (2008:847):

“The expansion of the Niger- Congo familypresumably is related to both […] technological aswell as climatological changes. Linguistic isolateslike Banga Me [sic], Dompo, Jalaa, Laal and Mpra,but also larger units like Songhai and Mandeconstitute remnants of an earlier diversity thatmust have characterized West Africa, as well asother parts of the continent.”


6

INTRODUCTION

Laal is said to have:

Bua (Adamawa, NC) characteristics Chadic (AA) characteristics Characteristics apparently unrelated to any

other neighbouring language or language family.


7

INTRODUCTION

PLAN:A. The speakers and their environmentB. Presentation of typological characteristics of Laal

1. Phonology2. Lexicon3. Nominal system4. Pronominal system5. Verbal system

Different “layers” will be identified in the course of the presentation.


8

PART A

The Laal speakers and their environment


9

A. The Laal speakers and their environment

Two villages on the banks of the Chari River, Southern

Chad, 140km NW of Sarh, ca. 500km SE of N’Djamena:

Gori (la in Laal)

Damtar (ɓual in Laal),


10


Map 1. The villages of Gori and Damtar (from Boyeldieu 1982a)


11


The people and their language are called “Gori” (Baguirmi name of the main village) by everyone else, including the administration.

No autonym:when they refer to themselves as muaŋ la (people from Gori) and muaŋ ɓual (people from Damtar)

The name they give to their language, yəw laal, is itself derived from the name of the main village (yəw =language; la = Gori; -al=nominal suffix used to derive language names)

The Gori are not hunter gatherers. Farming and fishing are the basis of their economy, like their neighbours (in particular the Niellim). Like the Niellim, they used to be cattle herders, but lost their cattle at the end of the 19th century.


12

A. Laal and the neighbouring languagesThe Gori speak at least three languages:

language who?ancient or recent?

notes

Lua (Bua, Adamawa)

all ancient strong cultural assimilation

Bua(Bua, Adamawa)

all ancient

Ndam(Chadic)

many ancient (?) More common in Damtar (more direct contact with the Ndam of Dik and of Kouno)

Baguirmi(SBB)

all recent tributary to the Baguirmi kingdom via the Bua: 16/17th(?)-early 20th century

Chadian Arabic men recent trade language, communication with Arabs, Fula, and Chadian people from outside the region


13

A. Laal and the neighbouring languages

Map 2. Laal and neighbouring languages


14


Problem: neighbouring languages are not well documented

In particular, virtually nothing on: Bua languagesː

Bua

Chadic languages (East, A)ː

Ndam

Miltu

Boor


15


Comparisons are possible with:- Bua languages:

- Lua (Boyeldieu 1985a)- Tun (Palayer)- Kulaal (Pairault 1969)

- Chadic languages:- East Chadic: Tumak (Caprile 1976), Kera (Ebert 1976, 1979, Pearce

2003)

- Central Chadic: Musgu group (Meyer-Bahlburg 1972, Tourneux1978)

- West Chadic: Ron group (Jungraithmayr 1966)


16

PART B

Typological characteristicsand tentative comparisons


17

A. The speakers and their environment

B. Typological characteristics & comparisons

1.Phonology2. Lexicon3. Nominal system4. Pronominal system5. Verbal system


18

1. Phonology

CONSONANTS:

Nothing unexpected in the area, except implosive /ʄ/

Bilabial Alveolar Palatal Velar Glottal

Voiceless pl. p t c k ʔ

Voiced pl. b d j [ɟ] g

Prenazalised pl. mb nd nj [ɲɟ] ng

Implosive ɓ ɗ ƴ [ʄ]

Nasal m n ɲ ŋ

Trill/flap r

Fricative s h

Approximant w l y


19

1. Phonology

Boyeldieu (1982b): /ʄ/ might be a Chadic feature:

Bua languages do not have /ʄ/

Some Chadic languages of the region do: East Chadic-A: Sibine/Somray (Ndam: no data. Tumak: no /ʄ/) East Chadic-B: Dangaleat, Migama (geographically far,

genetically far from Chadic East-A)


20

1. Phonology

Words with /ʄ/ in Laal are rare (8 roots):

ƴa~ʔia (pl. ʔi) „to receive/take‟ ƴuːri ~ʔuːri „be tired‟ (and ƴuryil ~ʔuryil „exhaustion‟) ƴug „to stutter‟ (and ƴugul „stutter(N)‟)

ƴormon „Cassia sp.‟ ƴawar „his maternal aunt‟ ƴawlal „her nephew (maternal aunt‟s)‟

ƴagar „very, much, a lot‟ ƴuag „to cough‟ (ƴuagal „cough (N)‟)


21

1. Phonology

No correspondence found so far with East Chadic languages (with or without /ʄ/)

Difficult to analyze it as a Chadic feature

Only attested in words that have no correspondent in any other language group of the region, East Chadic or Adamawa (Bua group, Day).

Inherited from different substrate? Or developed internally? (from /ʔ/+vowel sequences?)


22

1. Phonology

VOWELSNothing exceptional in the area, exc. front rounded vowels (u, uo, ua):

Initial syllable:front central back

[-rd] [+rd]

high i u [y] ɨ umid e uo [ɥo] ǝ olow i a (~ɛ) ua [ɥa] a ua (~ɔ)(<mid-low+low)

(Boyeldieu‟s (1982) transcription conventions)


23

1. Phonology

VOWELSNothing exceptional in the area, exc. front rounded vowels (u, uo, ua):

Non-initial syllable:front central back

[-rd] [+rd]

high i -- ɨ umid e -- ǝ olow -- -- a ua (~ɔ)(<mid-low+low)

(Boyeldieu‟s (1982) transcription conventions)


24

1. Phonology

Front rounded vowels (u, uo, ua) are rare in Laal

/uo/ and /ua/ = result of umlaut (vowel rounding harmony: more on this later, cf. pronominal system) can be considered allophones of /e/ and /ia/ respectively (more on that later)

/u/ =never result of umlaut in synchrony, but might have been historicallyː one case of fossilized umlaut: mialag „be red (sg)‟, mulug „be red (pl)‟

/u/ never occurs in non-initial syllables (like other front rounded vowels)


25

1. Phonology

Front rounded vowels are not attested in Bua languages

They are attested in a number of Central Chadic languages, and could be a Chadic element in Laal.

(see the analysis of pronominal suffixes on nouns and verbs below for more details).


26



1. Phonology

2.Lexicon3. Nominal system4. Pronominal system5. Verbal system


27

2. Lexicon

Not taken into account here: recent borrowings, mainly from:

Baguirmi (ca. 7% of total lexicon?), Chadian Arabic (via Baguirmi?) French (rare)


28

2. LexiconFew Chadic roots (Boyeldieu 1982b)

Proto-Chadic: N&M 1966[B&J 1993]

Laal Tumak(Caprile 1975)

Kera(Ebert 1976)

Migama(Jungraithmayr &

Adams 1992)

20 *m-t-[*mwt]

me / miwi „to die‟ ma me maato

23 *s-[*s2

y / wʔ / h]sɨr „to drink‟ he (s>h) se

33 *w-t-[*(w)kw]

ku / kuga „fire‟ kuu „burn‟ ʔokko

39 *( )k-r- kogor/ kuagra „rooster‟ gogloki guugur „chicken‟

kokkor

45 *k-[*wk]

goː / guaːmi „goat‟

45 *k-[*wk]

guaːl / goː „he-goat‟ gəwi

54-55 *k-r-m/*F-r-m

ruːm „knee‟

94 *(k-)s-m[*zm]

sa ːm / soːmo „skin‟ hum (s>h)

112 *k-(r)p- giːbi „to turn over‟


29

2. Lexicon

These words look different enough from their counterparts in neighbouring Chadic languages to rule out recent borrowing.

Two hypotheses remain:

1) Old borrowing from Chadic2) Genetic inheritance


30

2. Lexicon

Strong resemblance to Bua languages.In particular Lua

(20/30% of the lexicon)


31

2. Lexicon closer to Lua than to other Bua languages

LAAL LUA(Boyeldieu 1985)

TUN (Palayer 1975)

KULAAL (Pairault 1969)

pigeon(loːg / luagmi )

gugol (sg) gugool/gugoni

testicle(luagluag/lulag) hoːri (pl) hwani/honi

moon pè:wí pya :/pi :ngɨ hɛ fɛɛ/fee

pot kùlá / kǔrkula / konīkuuːna / koo ːri (shard)

kòr kããrɔ / ko o ri

take (with fingers?)

ɓan / ɓɨn ɓan ɓǝla moŋ

to do, to make ká / kí kà kày pààt


32

2. Lexicon

closer to other Bua languages than to Lua


TUN (Palayer 1975)


shoulder bag/bəːg, bəgi- pyaag/peeg (bəŋri) bəgɔ

axe sub / suba kwaːl sɨbi

hand tɨm/tɨmí daa: cɛ ɛ tẽ/tẽmon


33

2. Lexicon

Remotely similar to Bua forms:

toːg looks like an archaic form (final consonant kept in Laal but lost in other Bua languages)


TUN (Palayer 1975)


pestle toːg / tua ːgi tuu tuu tʊʊ / túú


34

2. Lexicon some items seem not to be found in any Bua language other than

Lua:


TUN (Palayer 1975)


OTHER ADAMAWA

elephant ɲe /ɲuaɲa ɲi / ɲi ːgɨ jer pala / pale ɲa (Day)

cerealyagal / yaː~yəgu

ya /yə laa lɛl/laan daa (Day)

sesame guanan gəni ta na / to ne sɔn (Day)

filter ngiaː ngya ːra a tɪl / a a tʊn

teer „to filter‟ (Day)

chicken tuà:r / tò:rò twaa:r / too ːr kulay hàlá / hale koni (Kutin)ko (Zing)

hoe mian / menu mɨɨna /miīni kuray

mortar nguan/ngono ngwani/ngoni fɔɔl / foon


35

2. Lexicon

HYPOTHESIS: Contact rather than common affiliation.

similarity patterns between Laal words and Bua counterparts are complex and seem to point to a complex history of borrowings (to different languages at different periods)

Only 20/30% of the Laal lexicon is concerned Proportion of items of Bua origin increases in domains

pertaining to agriculture, plants, material culture


36

2. LexiconBoyeldieu (1982b):

common items(+uncertain)

percentage Total items compared

Domesticactivities

29(+10)

24%(32%)

121

Body,physiologicalfunctions etc.

26(+13)

18%(27%)

141

Agriculture 14(+3)

33%(40%)

42

Flora 21(+11)

28%(43%)

74

Shared cultural substrate and continuous contacts lead to shared lexical items.


37

2. LexiconMain lexical stock: unrelated to any known language (in particular

core vocabulary)

Ex: body parts:

Laal Lua Tun Kulaal

head ɓagal/ɓɨgəy sul, suri hul/hun

eye mɨla/mɨni ji īī/iirī ííl/iin

ear sɨgal/sɨgəy tula/tori toy tʋ

mouth yəwəl/yəw- mu nɔɔ fʋ/fumon

tooth yamal/yəmi ɗəŋnī sàw nèèl

breast tawal/təwi- maaːn maɲ/maarī maal/moo

belly jīnan/jini- hul/hurī kɔn


38

2. LexiconEx: kinship terms:

Laal Lua Tun Kulaal

mother na ː-/neː- na ː/nəːgɨ naa (maa „mum‟)

father baː-/bəː- baː/bəːgɨ baa tɛɛ (paa „dad‟)

child can/yɨgər ɓa ː/ɓi ːm ɓaaɓatɔ/ ɓatɔm

brother nam-/wum-tīma/tīmgɨ nam (pl)

sister nɨm-/wum-

grand-father baːw-/bəː w-kaː/kəː gɨ

grand-mother maːm-/məː m-

paternal aunt ƴaw-/ƴəwi- ɓiī/ ɓiīrgɨ

maternal uncle namy-/wumaɲ- kwaaː/koybɨ titti

father-in-law baːw-/bəː w-mwaaː/mooybɨ

mother-in-law maːm-/məːm-


39

2. LexiconEx: numerals:

BUA GROUP EAST CHADIC PROTO-CHADIC

Laal Lua Kulaal Tumak Kera

1 ɓɨdɨl ɓudu ʈoŋ məən məna

2 ʔisi ndīdi rɔk hɛɛ (h>s) ɓasi *s-r-

3 maː teri toos suub soope

4 ɓīsan ɲɛni noro wəri waaɗe

5 sab luni luɲ usiɲ wiiɗiw

6 cicaːn taːr lu-en-ʈoŋ(5-and-1)

hugi kənəgi

7 suar ʔīsi (?+2)

loŋɡɔ lu-e-rɔk(5-and-2)

ɗag suub(?+3)

seeɗa

8 ɓisan ɓīsan(4+4)

twa ːɲɛni (?+4)

(sakɔ ?) wawaɽ(4+4?)

asəgən

9 yawjaŋ (sab) (bg.) sakɔlinnoro (?.4)

bəsamən tambəla

10 tuː (bg.) yippa kɔː ɽ (man)hor


40



1. Phonology2. Lexicon

3.Nominal system4. Pronominal system5. Verbal system


41

3. Nominal system

Threefold gender system:

masculine (human male) feminine (human female) neuter (non-human)

Not marked on nouns, but on nominal substitutes (pronouns) and the “connective” particle.


42

3. Nominal system

Subject pronouns (Boyeldieu 1982):

masc. fem. neuter

Sg 1 já jí —

2 ʔò —

3 ʔa ʔɨn ʔan

Pl 1ex ʔùrú —

1in ʔǎŋ —

2 ʔùn —

3 ʔì ʔuan


43

3. Nominal system

Connective particle (nominal qualification) (Lionnet, f.n.):Singular: Plural:

Masc: na:ra já lá vs. wūra yí lá

man CON.S.M Gori men CON.P.MF Gori

„the man from Gori‟ „the men from Gori‟ (Lionnet, f.n.)

Fem: nī:nī jí lá vs. yīnan yí lá

woman CON.S.F Gori women CON.P.MF Gori

„the woman from Gori‟ „the women from Gori‟ (Lionnet, f.n.)

Neuter: jìjèl má gùdà vs. jìjálá yá gùdùg

chamel. CON.S.N be.big.S chamel.P CON.P.N be.big.P

„big chameleon‟ „big chameleons‟ (Lionnet, f.n.)


44

3. Nominal system

No other language in the area possesses such a gender system:

Adamawa languages do not have gender distinctions

Most Chadic languages have a masc/fem disinction, but: no neuter fem/masc are not restricted to humans


45

3. Nominal system

Boyeldieu (1982b) mentions the existence of gender distinctions in the pronominal system of Zande languages (Ubanguian)

Sbj pr. in Zande and Geme

singular only(source: R.Boydin Segerer 2002-2007)

Zande Geme

1 mɩ mi

2 mo mɔ

3 masc ko ko

fem rɩ ale

animate ʊ

inanimate (ni= OBJ)

indefinite nɩ si

logophoric ʊ


46

3. Nominal system

CONCLUSION: the gender system of Laal is one of the features that most strongly support the isolate hypothesis: it has no equivalent in any other language with which it shares

other features (Chadic, Adamawa) it is an isolated feature in this part of Africa

Two hypotheses

1) Laal inherited its gender system from an unknown substrate

2) The gender system developed internally from a former system (although it is unlikely to have derived from Chadic masc/fem distinction)


47

3. Nominal system

Number marking: complex, similar to Bua languages.

Three ways to mark sg/pl distinction (excluding cases where only sg is attested, and cases where sg=pl)

1) stem suppletion (rare) mɨna/wura „thing‟ niːni/yīnan „woman‟


48

3. Nominal system

2) different inflectional suffixes (for sg and/or pl) + umlaut of non-high vowels of the root (raising or lowering) sub/suba „axe‟ jīŋa/jiŋu „fish sp.‟ wəːl/waːla „spur-winged goose‟ (V lowering) diag/degu „melon sp.‟ (V raising)

3) Umlaut only (presumably former suffix dropped) maw/məw „scorpion‟ kuaːri/koːri „monkey‟


49

3. Nominal system

Very similar to Lua and other Bua languages.

Boyeldieu (1980, 1983, 1985a, 1986a) about Lua, Tun and Kulaal: Number marking suffixes = remains of noun class suffixes

umlaut = secondary feature triggered by suffix (remains as the only mark when suffix drops)

+ reconstruction of the proto-Bua class suffix pairings, and conclusive comparison with Tula (Adamawa, Nigeria).


50

NB. OF N

SUFFIX ALTERNATION UMLAUTRECONSTRUCTED SUFFIX ALTERNATION ( ?)

NB. OF N

PROTO-BUA

11 a/u Rais*A/*U 37

26 ∅/u ? Rais

3 a/o Rais *A/*O (=*A/*U?)

2421 ∅/o ? Rais

3 a/i Rais*A/*I 25 *A/*I

22 ∅/i ? Rais

1 o/a Low *O/*A (*U/*A?)

2524 ∅/a ? Low

12 al/∅ *AL/∅ (singulative) 12

6 ∅/aɲ Low*XXX/ƝA 12

6 ∅/ɲa Low

5 l/r Rais *L/*R 5 *L/*R (*L/*RI)

4 ∅/ma Rais *XXX/MA 4*XXX/*M (*BV) ?

4 ∅/mi Low *XXX/MI 4

4 ∅/ri Low *XXX/RI 4*L/*RI?or: *M/*(M)RI ?

3 ∅/ga Rais*XXX/GA(fluids)

3

2 l/n *L/*N 2 *L/*N

*U/I

*XXX*/*KI


51

3. Nominal system

NB: Boyeldieu (1982b): Laal has old Bua morphology, still attested in Kulaal: suffix –(a)l (one or several suffixes?)

singulative –al attested in Kulaal (rare, archaic) maal/moo „corner, breast‟ nal/no neel/nee

suffix -(a)l deriving language names: Laal: la (Gori) laal (Gori language, Laal) Kulaal: kùlaa „(Goula) person‟ kùlaal (Kulaal)

suffix –(a)l nominalizing verbsː Laal: ƴuag „to cough‟ ƴuagal „cough‟ Kulaal: úii „to die‟ ùaal „death‟ Lua: si „(he…) goes‟ saaːl „going‟


52

3. Nominal systemPlurals in –a: a Chadic feature? (Boyeldieu 1982b)Hypothesis: suffix –a (+ infixation of –a–): bīːr/bīːra „stone‟ mol/muala „millet sp.‟ ngəj/ngaja „cotton basket‟

Cf. Ron languages (West Chadic, Jungraithmayr 1966)ː “internal –a- plurals” = -a- is inserted within noun root, most of the time added to the root vowel. diir/diyar „eye‟ sakur/sakwar „leg‟ bɔr/bwar „home‟


53

3. Nominal systemRON LAAL

sg pl sg pl

i+a>ya diir diyar „eye‟ -i-+-a > -i-+-a bīːr bīːra „stone‟High Vsdo not change(1 exception)

-ɨ-+-a > -ɨ-+-a nɨmɨn nɨmna „salt‟

u+a>wa sakur sakwar „leg‟-u-+-a > -u-+-a(1 exc. > -ua-+-a)

sublugor

suba „axe‟luagra „mud‟

e+a>ya matel matyal hen‟ -e-+-a >-(i)a-+-a jijel jijala „chameleon‟

mid Vsare lowered

-ə-+-a > -a-+-a wəːl waːla „bird sp.‟

o+a>wa hoi hwa i „head‟ -o-+-a > -ua-+-a kogor kuagra „rooster‟

-ia-+-a > -ia-+-a mial miala „shadow‟low Vsdo not change

ɔ+a>wa bɔr bwar „home‟ --

a+a>aa hai haayi „head‟ --


54

3. Nominal system

Conclusion: No internal -a- plural in Laal.

RON LAAL

All Vs change (and a+a = aa) Only mid-Vs change

ya and wa are not one V, but two Vs:

ya < i/e+a

wa< u/o/ɔ +a

ia and ua are diphthongized vowels:

ia< ɛ

ua<ɔ

conclusionː -A- INSERTION conclusionː UMLAUT


55

3. Nominal system

Hypotheses: Pairings similar to proto-Bua = borrowings (mainly

from Lua) Other pairings (including plurals in –a): EITHER old borrowings from Bua (morphology not

attested anymore in Lua, Tun and Kulaal) OR purely Laal morphology (inherited from substrate) OR Niger-Congo morphology corresponding to former

noun class suffixes, not borrowed from Bua. inherited from Niger-Congo ancestor or borrowed from other (pre-Bua?) Niger-Congo languages

not attested anymore.


56



1. Phonology2. Lexicon3. Nominal system

4.Pronominal system5. Verbal system


57

4. Pronominal system

Subject pronouns (Boyeldieu 1982):Remarkable features:

masc/fem distinction for 1Sand not 2S (different from Chadic)

masc/fem/nt distinction for 3S(not Chadic, not NC, but similar to Zande)

reduction to masc+fem/nt for 3S

masc fem. neuter

Sg 1 já jí —

2 ʔò —

3 ʔa ʔɨn ʔan

Pl 1ex ʔùrú —

1in ʔǎŋ —

2 ʔùn —

3 ʔì ʔuan


58


Laal subject pronouns compared with Bua languages:

LAAL LUA KULAAL1S m ja n ɲo / n1S f ji2S ʔo m mo / m3S m ʔa

r / r a3S f ʔɨn3S n ʔan1P ex ʔuru i pʊ1P in ʔaŋ i en2P ʔun i i3P mf ʔi a ʊ3P n ʔuan


59


Laal subject pronouns compared with Chadic (East A) languages:

Laal Kera Tumak

1S m jaten nə

1S f ji

2S ʔo tam (m) /te (f)

yə (m) /mə (f)

3S m ʔa to / wə ɗaan

3S f ʔɨn ta / a taan

3S n ʔan -- --

1P ex ʔuru are na

1P in ʔaŋ aŋ di

2P ʔun aŋ ni

3P mf ʔi te / ye kə

3P n ʔuan -- --


60


Pronominal suffixes (after nouns = inalienable possession, after tr. verbs = Obj)

Laal -r- Laal -n- Kera Tumak

1S -ər -ən -n -n

2S -a -(u)an -m (m) / -i (f) -m (m) / -i (f)

3S m -ar -an -u -l / -r / -o

3S f -o -on -(r)a -d

3S n -ar / -an -an -- --

1P ex -ru -nuru are (= indpdt form) nan

1P in -raŋ -naŋ aŋ (= indpdt form) ni

2P -rǔŋ -nǔŋ -ŋ nin / nen

3P mf -ri -niri -i -g

3P n -ar / -an -an -- --


61


n- +pr. suff. in Laal and Kera (benefactive/possessive)

Laal Benefactive pr. Kera possessive pr.

1S ni nin

2S na nəmti (m) / niiti (f)

3S m nar nuutu

3S f nug naata

3S n nana --

1P ex nuru nare

1P in naŋ naŋ

2P nǔŋ nəəti

3P mf niri nəəte

3P n nuana --


62


n- +pr. suff. in Laal and Kera (benefactive/possessive)

Laal ɗe +pr. suf.. Kera də+ pr. suf.

1S ɗe ː dən

2S ɗaː dəm (m) / di (f)

3S m ɗaːr du

3S f ɗoːg də

3S n ɗa ːna --

1P ex ɗoːro də are

1P in ɗaŋ də aŋ

2P ɗoŋ dəŋ

3P mf ɗeːri di

3P n ɗua ːna --


63


Combining pronominal suffixes and roots: VOWEL HARMONY

HEIGHT harmony (suffixroot, rootsuffix) suffix root, features at work = [+/-low] on suffix V, [-high] on root V High vowels in root are not concerned Neutralization between mid (e, ə, o) and low (ia, a, ua) vowels in root root V is low when suffix V is low (a, ua) root V is mid when suffix V is mid (e, ə)

root suffix, features at work=[-low] on suffix V, [+/- high] on root V: Suffixes with low vowels (a, ua) are not concerned mid V [-high, -low] of suffix (ə, o) becomes high (ɨ, u) when root V is

high (i, ɨ, u)

ROUNDING harmony (suffixroot): root V is rounded if suff. V is rounded


64

4. Pronominal systemVerb + „you sg.‟ -a(n) [<*-ua(n)]

HEIGHT +

ROUNDING

High V

/i/ ɗiːr „let in [pl]‟ + -an > ʔi ɗuːran „They let you(sg) in.‟

/ɨ/ dɨg „pull [pl]‟ + -an > ʔi dugan „They pulled you(sg).‟

/u/ ku(ːr) „see‟ + -a > ʔi kuːra „They saw you(sg).‟

Mid/low V

/IA/ sIAr „sting‟ + -an > ja suaran „I stung you(sg).‟

/A/ ɗAːr „let in [sg‟ + -an > ja ɗuaːran „I let you(sg).‟

/UA sUAr „find‟ + -a > ja suara „I found you(sg).‟


65

4. Pronominal systemVerb + „her‟ -(r)ò ~ -ò(n)

HEIGHT +

ROUNDING

High V /i/ ɗiːr „let in [pl]‟ + -on > ʔi ɗuːrun „they let her in‟

/ɨ/ dɨg „pull [pl]‟ + -o > ʔi dugu „they pulled her‟

/u/ ku(ːr) „see‟ + -ro > ʔi kuːru „they saw her‟

Mid/low V /IA/ sIAr „sting‟ + -on > ja suoron „I stung her‟

/A/ ɗAːr „let in [sg‟ + -on > ja ɗoːron „I let her in‟

/UA sUAr „find‟ + -o > ja soro „I found her‟


66


NB: about front rounded vowels /uo/ and /ua/ always the result of vowel harmony, mostly in verbal system

(morphologically determined allophones) Unattested in Bua languages, and in documented Chadic languages

of the region. Reminiscent of Central Chadic languages (Daba, Mafa, Gidar, cf.

Pearce 2003, Musgu group cf. Tourneux (1978)) They are never phonemes, but always analyzed as the result of labialization

Ex: Vulum (Musgu group, Tourneux 1978:307, 309):

verb root+ nominalising suffix –i: s +-i > si „drink‟ sw +-i > su „come‟


67


Comparison with Kera:

HEIGHT harmony: both from suffix to root and from root to suffixː “any high vowel in any position will cause any other vowel within the morphological word to be high” (Pearce 2003).

FRONTING and ROUNDING harmony (only from suffix to root, only underlying HIGH vowels are concerned): high central vowel /ɨ/ is fronted to /i/ when suffix is -i high central vowel /ɨ/ is rounded to /u/ when suffix is -u


68

4. Pronominal systemKera (Pearce 2003) -a 3Sf -i (/-y) 2Sf -u 3Sm

[High]

giːd- „stomach‟ giːdɨ „her stomach‟ giːdi „your(f) stomach giːdu „his stomach‟

cɨː(r-) „head‟ cɨːrɨ ciːri cuːru

guːd- „behind‟ guːdɨ guːdi guːdu

[-High]

sɛːn- „borther‟ sɛːna siːni siːnu

kaːs- „hand‟ kaːsa kɨːsi kɨːsu

gɔld- „to search‟ gɔlda gulduy guldu


69

4. Pronominal systemConclusion:

The pronominal suffixes are used in exactly the same contexts in Laal and Kera (also Tumak): with Nouns : inalienable possession with Verbs : object pronouns with prepositions to form particular pronouns (benefactive, possessive)

Some Laal and Kera forms are close enough to suggest a potential relation (the nature of which has yet to be determined): Plural pronouns and pronominal suffixes (neuter excepted) Combination with n- : possessive pronouns (alienable in Laal, inalienable in Kera) Combination with preposition ɗe (Laal), də (Kera)ː possessive pronouns (inalienable in Laal,

alienable in Kera) (Are these prepositions related in both languages?)

Nearly the same phonological rules: HEIGHT and ROUNDING harmonies in both languages (+Fronting in Kera), giving rise to front rounded vowels (uo, ua) as in many other Chadic languages (cf. comparison with Vulum, slide 29)


70


Conclusion: the pronominal system of Laal is very likely to be (at least partly) of Chadic origin.

HYPOTHESES:

1) either genetic inheritance2) or very old borrowing

Why old? Chadic languages with front rounded vowels are geographically far from the

Laal speaking area, and genetically very far from East Chadic languages The closest Chadic match seems to be Kera, which is spoken 300 km from

the Laal speaking area, and has most probably never been in direct contact with Laal.


71



1. Phonology2. Lexicon3. Nominal system4. Pronominal system

5. Verbal system


72

4. Verbal systemEvery verb comes in three forms:

“simple” form: simplest, more frequent, unmarked for tense/aspect/mood

“centripetal” form: movement towards the speaker (space/time)

ʔa ɗā:r gɨ ɲaw

3S.M enter LOC house„He is entering the house.‟ (Boyeldieu 1982a:116)

z

ʔa ɗà:rà gɨ ɲaw3S.M enter:C LOC house„He is entering the house (where I am, towards me).‟ (id.)


73

4. Verbal system

“participative” (instrumental) form: usually used in complex utterances, and indicating that the process is performed by means of or in the same time as the preceding process:

já sɨr sū1S.M drink water

„I drink water.‟

ʔa sá ɗa:g ʔa sɨrɨ sū

3S.M take calabash 3S.M drink:PT water„He takes a calabash and drinks water (with it)‟ (Boyeldieu 1982a:119)


74

4. Verbal system

syll. str.form of C suff.

Simple Centripetal(M tone L)

Participative= C+extra H tone

CV -(r)V„take‟„do‟

toka

toːkara

toːkara

CV: (-rV)„let, leave‟„boil‟

ɲa ːwa ː

ɲa ːwa ːra

ɲa ːwa ːra

CVC -V „refuse‟ pal pala pala

CV:C -V „press‟ maːr maːra maːra

CVC(C)V ∅ „hear‟ yīra yira yira

CVCi/u -V „scatter‟ səri səryə səryə

CV1(:)CV2C -V „remove‟ sɨraŋ sɨrŋa sɨrŋa


75

4. Verbal system

Very different from neighbouring languages (and from African languages in general?): Bua languages: Lua, Bua and Tun have an indicative/optative (“injonctif”) distinction expressed by way of a tonal distinction (Boyeldieu 1985b)

Chadic languages have a perfective/imperfective distinction

+ old (eroded) morphology: C suffix is eroded –(r)V P is distinct from C only by tones: old H-toned suffix disappeared, leaving

only a H tone?

Another strong argument for the isolate hypothesis.


76

4. Verbal systemVerbal plural: a restricted set of verbs (126/393) have a distinct

plural form when their subject is plural Not attested in Bua (and more generally Adamawa) languages Attested in many Chadic languages (cf. Newman 1990)

Morphology, 3 classes (reminiscent of nominal morphology):

1) Vowel raising: TRANSITIVE verbska/ki „do‟ to/tu „eat‟ ɗual/ɗol „pick up (wood)‟

2) Pl. suffix -i/-iɲ/-ɨɲ (+V raising):wal/wolìɲ „fall‟ sar/sərìɲ‘sit’ tuagar/togrɨɲ „break‟

3) Other means INTRANSITIVE (STATIVE) verbssaːl/seː „be old‟ yeːr/yarmi „be crazy‟ dɨga/dɨg „be dirty‟


77

4. Verbal systemBoyeldieu (1982) hypothesizes that a/i, ɨ verbs such as ka/ki „do‟ and

kaw/kɨw „fix‟ could be of Chadic origin, cf. Musgu group (central Chadic) verb plural formation.

Pers. Pr. Verb roots h-l „go‟ / d „cook‟

final element

Notes

1S mu hal / d -a

2S kə hal / d -a

3Sm a hal / d -a

3Sf tə hal / d -a

1Pin ku hul / d(<hil?)

-(u)-mu(<i-mu?

regressive vowel assimilation (raising, fronting and rounding)

1Pex mi hil / d -i id. without rounding

2P ki hil / d -i id.

3P a hil / d -i id.


78

4. Verbal system

In Laal: No trace of a “final element” (be it a suffix or a discontinuous part

of the subject pronoun) However, vowel raising in the plural could be due to a former suffix

(with a H vowel, e.g. -i): suffix dropped, leaving umlaut as the only distinction between sg/pl except on verb roots consisting of only one C (cf. d „to cook‟ in Musgu)

Scenario: *kaw-a / *kɨw-i > ka / kɨw „to fix‟

*k-a / *k-i > ka / ki „to do, make‟


79

4. Verbal system

Problemsː Those verbs have no apparent cognates in the Chadic languages of

the region (or in the proposed reconstructions of proto-Chadic) Some verbs have clear correspondents in Bua languages (the plural

form exists only in Laal: could be common Chadic borrowings, or a reanalysis of Bua borrowings with Chadic morphology, among many other possibilities…)

Laal Lua Tun

to do, to make ká / kí kà kày

to fix kaːw/kɨ ːw kaːw


80

CONCLUSION


81

CONCLUSION

Laal vs. Chadic and Bua/Adamawa languages:

its non-Chadic characteristics are too important to make it a Chadic language (+very few Chadic cognates)

Too many non-Bua (non-Adamawa) characteristics for it to be a Bua (or Adamawa) language, despite the important number of cognates (most likely due to borrowing).


82

CONCLUSION

There are still unanswered questions and uncertainties, and more data needs to be gathered/analyzed on Laal and neighbouring languages.

However, one hypothesis stands out so far: Laal is a three-layered language: Isolate substrate Chadic influence Bua influence


83

CONCLUSION

Possible history of the three layers:

1) Isolate substrate = oldest part of Laal core vocabulary gender system (masculine/feminine/neuter) Part of the nominal number marking system (?) verbal system: three verbal forms:

Simple/Centripetal/Participative part of the pronominal system (the rest = Chadic borrowing?) (palatal implosive? or Chadic influence?)


84

CONCLUSION2) Old Chadic influence: not easy to identify, so old that

lexical borrowings are no longer identifiable? a few lexical roots part of the pronominal system Form: Plural subject/independent pronouns and pronominal

suffixes (+1S and 2S?) System: pronominal suffixes usage (possible combinations +

semantics) Vowel harmony (giving rise to front rounded vowels, as in

Central Chadic) More active in the most archaic/conservative parts of the

language (more in verbs than in nouns) Some sg/pl verb pairings (a/i,ɨ)?


85

CONCLUSION2) Old continuous (and ongoing) Bua influence

(different old Bua languages, then mainly Lua?): easier to identify.

Numerous lexical items: the degree of cognateness (and ease of identification) is inversely proportional to the time depth of the borrowings

Nominal number marking system (only part of it): same traces of noun classes as in Bua languages (through very old borrowings no longer recognizable?+reanalysis of substrate nouns under the influence of borrowed Adamawa nouns?)


86

REFERENCESBARRETEAU Daniel & Hermann JUNGRAITHMAYR. 1993. Calculs lexicostatistiques et glottochronologiques sur les langues

tchadiques. In D.Barreteau & C. von Graffenried (eds.). Datation et chronologie dans le bassin du Lac Chad = Dating and chronology in the Lake Chad basin. Paris:ORSTOM (Colloques et Séminaires), 1993, pp. 103-139.

BOYELDIEU, Pascal. 1977. "Eléments pour une phonologie du laal de Gori (Moyen-Chari), in Caprile, J.-P. Etudes phonologiquestchadiennes. Paris: SELAF (Bibliothèque, 63–64), p. 186–198.

BOYELDIEU, Pascal. 1979. Présentation du láà:l ou “gori” (Moyen-Chari, Tchad). Unpublished manuscript, CNRS-LLACAN, Paris.

BOYELDIEU, Pascal. 1980. Niellim et tula (langues «adamawa»): concordances morphologiques (pluriels nominaux). in L. Bouquiaux, G. Guarisma, and G. Manessy, Eds. Problèmes de comparatisme et de dialectologie dans les langues africaines. Paris: SELAF, p. 43-51.

BOYELDIEU, Pascal. 1982a. Deux Etudes laal (Moyen-Chari, Tchad). Berlin: Dietrich Reimer Verlag.

BOYELDIEU, Pascal. 1982b. Quelques questions portant sur la classification du laal (Tchad). in H. Jungraithmayr, Ed. The Chad languages in the Hamitosemitic-Nigritic Border Area (Papers of the Marburg Symposium, 1979). Berlin: Dietrich Reimer, p. 80-93.

BOYELDIEU, Pascal. 1983. Vestiges de suffixes de classes nominales dans les langues du groupe boua (Tchad, Adamawa-13 de J.H. Greenberg). Current Approaches to African Linguistics (Actes du 13ème Colloque Annuel de Linguistique Africaniste, Montréal, Canada). Dordrecht: Foris Publications, p. 3-15.

BOYELDIEU, Pascal. 1985a. La langue lua (“niellim”) (groupe Boua – Moyen-Chari, Tchad). Phonologie – Morphologie –Dérivation verbale. Paris: SELAF.

BOYELDIEU, Pascal. 1985b. Présentation sommaire du groupe boua, Tchad (Adamawa 13 de Greenberg). in Colloques et séminaires: Le Milieu et les Hommes. Recherches comparatives et historiques dans la bassin du lac Tchad. Actes du 2ème colloqueMéga-Tchad ORSTOM BONDY, le 3 et 4 octobre 1985. Ministère française de la Coopération & MESRES Cameroun. pp. 275 -286.

BOYELDIEU, Pascal. 1986a. La formation du pluriel nominal en kulaal (Tchad): essai de systématisation des documents publiéspar C. Pairault. Afrika und Übersee. Vol. 69(2), p. 209-249.

http://www.uni-bayreuth.de/afrikanistik/mega-tchad/Table/Presentation/lemilieuetleshommes.html





87

REFERENCESCAPRILE, Jean-Pierre. 1975. Lexique Tumak-Français (Tchad).Berlin: Dietrich Reimer.

DIMMENDAAL, Gerrit J. 2008. Language Ecology and Linguistic Diversity on the African Continent. Language and Linguistics Compass, 2/5:840-858.

EBERT, Karen H. 1976. Sprache und Tradition des Kera (Tschad). Teil II: Lexikon/lexique. Berlin: Dietrich Reimer.

EBERT, Karen H. 1979. Sprache und Tradition des Kera (Tschad). Teil III: Grammatik. Berlin: Dietrich Reimer.

JUNGRAITHMAYR, Herrmann. 1966. Internal A in Ron Plurals. Journal of African Languages, 4-2:102-107.

JUNGRAITHMAYR, Herrmann & Abakar ADAMS. 1992. Lexique Migama: Migama-français et français-migama (Guéra, Tchad) avec une introduction grammaticale. Berlin: Dietrich Reimer.

MEYER-BAHLBURG, Hilke. 1972. Studien zurMorphologie und Syntax des Musgu. Hamburg: Helmut Buske.

NEWMAN, Paul. 1990. Nominal and Verbal Plurality in Chadic. Dordrecht: Foris. (Publications in African Languages and Linguistics, 12)

NEWMAN, Paul & Roxana MA. 1966. Comparative Chadic: Phonology and Lexicon. Journal of African Languages, 5-2, 1966:218-251.

NOUGAYROL, Pierre. 1980. Le Day de Bouna (Tchad), 2: lexique day-français, index français-day. Paris : Société des Etudes Linguistiques et Anthropologiques de France (SELAF). 178 pp.

PAIRAULT, Claude. 1969. Documents du parler d’Iro: kùlaal du Tchad. Paris: Klincksieck.

PALAYER, Pierre. Esquisse phonologique de la langue tounia. in P.Boyeldieu & P.Palayer, Les Langues du groupe Boua (Tchad). N‟Djamena: INSH.

PEARCE, Mary. 2003. Vowel Harmony in Kera (Chad). MA thesis, ms. University College London.

SEGERER, Guillaume. 2002-2007. Les marques personnelles dans les langues africaines, [online database]. http://sumale.vjf.cnrs.fr/pronoms/ (as of 30 Oct 2010).

TOURNEUX, Henri. 1978. Le mulwi ou vulum de Mogroum (Tchad), Phonologie - Eléments de grammaire. (Bibliothèque de la SELAF ; 68-69-70.) Paris:SELAF.

http://sumale.vjf.cnrs.fr/pronoms/