Kuliak | |
---|---|
Rub | |
Geographic distribution | Karamoja region, northeastern Uganda |
Linguistic classification | Nilo-Saharan?
|
Proto-language | Proto-Kuliak |
Subdivisions | |
Language codes | |
Glottolog | kuli1252 |
![]() |
The Kuliak languages, also called the Rub languages, [1] are a group of languages spoken by small relict communities in the mountainous Karamoja region of northeastern Uganda.
Nyang'i and Soo are moribund, with a handful of elderly speakers. However, Ik is vigorous and growing.
Word order in Kuliak languages is verb-initial. [2]
The Kuliak languages are also called the Rub languages by Ehret (1981), since Ehret reconstructed "Rub" to mean 'person' in Proto-Kuliak. He suggests that "Kuliak" may actually be a derogatory term used by neighboring Nilotic-speaking peoples to disparage Kuliak speakers as "poor," hence his preference for using Rub instead. [3] However, Kuliak continues to be the most widely used name, and is preferred by Roger Blench, Terrill Schrock, Sam Beer and other linguists, who note that the name "Kuliak" is not perceived as offensive or pejorative by any Kuliak speakers.[ citation needed ]
The Kuliak languages have previously had a much more extensive range in the past. Kuliak Loanwords in the Luhya, Gusii, Kalenjin and Sukuma languages show that these peoples inhabited western kenya and the southern parts of Lake Victoria before being absorbed by the ancestors of these Bantu and Nilotic speakers. These now extinct kuliak peoples are known as the "Southern Rub". The Southern Rub lived as far south as Lake Eyasi as shown by Kuliak loanwords in the Hadza and Sandawe languages. [4] [5]
According to the classification of Heine (1976), [6] Soo and Nyang'i form a subgroup, Western Kuliak, while Ik stands by itself.
Kuliak | |
According to Schrock (2015), "Dorobo" is a spurious language, is not a fourth Kuliak language, and may at most be a dialect of Ik. [7]
Heine finds the following numbers of correspondences between the languages on the 200-word Swadesh list:
Bender (1989) had classified the Kuliak languages within the Eastern Sudanic languages. Later, Bender (2000) revised this position by placing Kuliak as basal branch of Nilo-Saharan. Glottolog treats Kuliak as an independent language family and does not accept Nilo-Saharan as a valid language family.
An early suggestion for Ik as a member of Afroasiatic was made by Archibald Tucker in the 1960s; this was criticized as weak and abandoned by the 1980s. [8]
The following sound correspondences are identified by Bernd Heine (1976), [6] who proposes also corresponding Proto-Kuliak reconstructions.
Ik | Tepes | Nyang'i | Proto-Kuliak | Phonological environment |
---|---|---|---|---|
b | b ~ p | b | *b | |
ɓ | ɓ | ɓ | *ɓ | |
ɗ ~ d | d | d | *d | |
dz | ∅ | ∅ | *dz | Initially. Fricative z in Dorobo. |
d | s | (?) | Medially. No reflexes known in Nyang'i. | |
ɟ ~ ʄ | ɟ | ɟ | *ɟ | |
g | g | g | *g | Initially, before back vowels |
ɟ | g | ɟ | Initially, before front vowels | |
g | ∅ | ∅ | Medially | |
f | p | p | *p | |
t | t | t | *t | |
ts | c | c | *c | |
c | k | k | *kj | Initially and medially |
h | k | k | Finally | |
k | k | k | *k | |
kw | w | kw | *kw | Word-initially |
k | ∅ | ∅ | *kʰ | |
tsʼ | ʄ | ʄ | *cʼ | Initially |
s | s | s | Medially | |
kʼ | ɠ | ɠ | *kʼ | |
s | s | s | *s | Initially |
r | s | s | Medially | |
ɬ | l | ɬ | *ɬ | Initially |
ɬ | l | iɬ | Finally | |
h | ∅ | ∅ | *h | Initially |
∅ | ʔ | ∅ | Finally | |
z | (?) | s | *z | No reflex known in Tepes |
m | m | m | *m | |
n | n | n | *n | |
ɲ | ɲ | ɲ | *ɲ | |
ŋ | ŋ | ŋ | *ŋ | Initially, by default |
ɲ | ŋ | ŋ | Initially, before *ɛ | |
r | ? | ɲ | Medially and finally | |
l | l | l | *l | Finally, a plosive /t/ in Dorobo. |
r | r | r | *r | Initially and at the end of monosyllabic words |
r | ∅ | r | Elsewhere | |
r | r | r | *rr | Medially |
∅ | j | ∅ | *j | Initially and finally |
j | j | j | Medially | |
w | w | w | *w | Default |
w ~ ∅ | ∅ | w | Finally after *k, *g |
Ik | Tepes | Nyang'i | Proto-Kuliak | Phonological environment |
---|---|---|---|---|
a | a | a | *a | Default |
a | a | ɛ | Preceded by any non-open vowel | |
a | e | e | Followed by a high vowel *i, *u | |
a | ɛ | ɛ | Unstressed, when followed by a semivowel *j, *w | |
ɛ | ɛ | ɛ | *ɛ | In Tepes and Nyang'i, /e/ and /ɛ/ can alternate morphophonologically. |
e | e | e | *e | |
i | e | e | *ẹ | |
e | i | i | *I | |
i | i | i | *i | |
ɔ | ɔ | ɔ | *ɔ | In Tepes and Nyang'i, /o/ and /ɔ/ can alternate morphophonologically. |
o | o | o | *o | |
u | o | o | *ọ | |
o | u | u | *U | |
u | u | u | *u |
For other vowel correspondences, Heine reconstructs clusters of vowels:
Heine reconstructs two classes of stress in Proto-Kuliak: "primary", which could occur in any position and remains in place in all Kuliak languages, and "secondary", which always occurred on the 2nd syllable of a word, and remains there in Ik and Nyang'i, but shifts to the first syllable in Tepes.
Blench [9] notes that Kuliak languages do not have extensive internal diversity and clearly had a relatively recent common ancestor. There are many monosyllabic VC (vowel + consonant) lexical roots in Kuliak languages, which is typologically unusual among Nilo-Saharan languages and is more typical of some Australian languages such as Kunjen. Blench considers these VC roots to have cognates in other Nilo-Saharan languages, and suggests that the VC roots may have been eroded from earlier Nilo-Saharan roots that had initial consonants. [9]
Significant influences from Cushitic languages, [10] and more recently Eastern Nilotic languages, are observable in the vocabulary and phonology of Kuliak languages. Blench [9] notes that Kuliak appears to retain a core of non-Nilo-Saharan vocabulary, suggesting language shift from an indigenous language like that seen in Dahalo.
![]() | This article should specify the language of its non-English content, using {{ lang }}, {{ transliteration }} for transliterated languages, and {{ IPA }} for phonetic transcriptions, with an appropriate ISO 639 code. Wikipedia's multilingual support templates may also be used.(June 2022) |
Comparison of numerals in individual languages: [11]
Language | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Ik (1) | kɔ̀nʊ̀kᵓ (lit. and it's one) | lèɓètsìn (lit. and it's two) | àɗìn (lit. and it's three) | tsʼàɡùsìn (lit. and it's four) | tùdìn (lit. and it's five) | tudini ńda kɛɗɪ kɔn (5+ 1) | tudini ńda kiɗi léɓetsᵉ (5+ 2) | tudini ńda kiɗi aɗ (5+ 3) | tudini ńda kiɗi tsʼaɡús (5+ 4) | tomín |
Ik (2) | kɔnᵃ | léɓetsᵃ | aɗᵃ / aɗᵉ | tsʔaɡúsᵃ | túdᵉ | ńda-keɗi-kɔnᵃ (5+ 1) | ńda-kiɗi-léɓetsᵃ (5+ 2) | ńda-kiɗiá-aɗᵉ (5+ 3) | ńda-kiɗi-tsʔaɡúsᵃ (5+ 4) | tomín |
Nyang'i | nardok | nɛʔɛc | iyʔɔn | nowʔe | tud | mɔk kan kapei | mɔk tomin | |||
Soo (Tepes) (1) | nɛ́dɛ̀s | ínɛ̀'bɛ́c | ínì'jɔ̀n | ín'ùáʔ | íntùd | ˌíntùd ká ˈnɛ́dɛ̀s (5+ 1) | ˌíntùd ká ínɛ̀'bɛ̀c (5+ 2) | ˌíntùd ká ínì'jɔ́n (5+ 3) | ˌíntùd ká ínùáʔ (5+ 4) | mì'míɾínìk |
Soo (Tepes) (2) | ɛdɛs | nɛbɛc | iyon | nowa | tuɗ | tuɗ ka nɪ ɛdɛs (5+ 1) | tuɗ ka nɪ nɛbɛc (5+ 2) | tuɗ ka nɪ iyon (5+ 3) | tuɗ ka nɪ nowa (5+ 4) | tuɗ en-ek iɠe (hand-PL all) |
The Afroasiatic languages are a language family of about 400 languages spoken predominantly in West Asia, North Africa, the Horn of Africa, and parts of the Sahara and Sahel. Over 500 million people are native speakers of an Afroasiatic language, constituting the fourth-largest language family after Indo-European, Sino-Tibetan, and Niger–Congo. Most linguists divide the family into six branches: Berber, Chadic, Cushitic, Egyptian, Omotic, and Semitic. The vast majority of Afroasiatic languages are considered indigenous to the African continent, including all those not belonging to the Semitic branch.
The Chadic languages form a branch of the Afroasiatic language family. They are spoken in parts of the Sahel. They include 196 languages spoken across northern Nigeria, southern Niger, southern Chad, and northern Cameroon. By far the most widely spoken Chadic language is Hausa, a lingua franca of much of inland Eastern West Africa, particularly Niger and the northern half of Nigeria. Hausa, along with Mafa and Karai Karai, are the only three Chadic languages with more than 1 million speakers.
The Cushitic languages are a branch of the Afroasiatic language family. They are spoken primarily in the Horn of Africa, with minorities speaking Cushitic languages to the north in Egypt and Sudan, and to the south in Kenya and Tanzania. As of 2012, the Cushitic languages with over one million speakers were Oromo, Somali, Beja, Afar, Hadiyya, Kambaata, and Sidama.
Niger–Congo is a hypothetical language family spoken over the majority of sub-Saharan Africa. It unites the Mande languages, the Atlantic–Congo languages, and possibly several smaller groups of languages that are difficult to classify. If valid, Niger–Congo would be the world's largest in terms of member languages, the third-largest in terms of speakers, and Africa's largest in terms of geographical area. Austronesian has almost as many member languages, although this is complicated by the ambiguity about what constitutes a distinct language; the number of named Niger–Congo languages listed by Ethnologue is 1,540.
The Nilo-Saharan languages are a proposed family of around 210 African languages spoken by somewhere around 70 million speakers, mainly in the upper parts of the Chari and Nile rivers, including historic Nubia, north of where the two tributaries of the Nile meet. The languages extend through 17 nations in the northern half of Africa: from Algeria to Benin in the west; from Libya to the Democratic Republic of the Congo in the centre; and from Egypt to Tanzania in the east.
Christopher Ehret, who currently holds the position of Distinguished Research Professor at UCLA, is an American scholar of African history and African historical linguistics particularly known for his efforts to correlate linguistic taxonomy and reconstruction with the archeological record. He has published many works, including Reconstructing Proto-Afrasian (1995) and Ancient Africa (2023). He has written around seventy scholarly articles on a wide range of historical, linguistic, and anthropological subjects. These works include monographic articles on Bantu subclassification; on internal reconstruction in Semitic; on the reconstruction of proto-Cushitic and proto-Eastern Cushitic; and, with Mohamed Nuuh Ali, on the classification of the Somali languages.
Shabo is an endangered language and likely language isolate spoken by about 400 former hunter-gatherers in southwestern Ethiopia, in the eastern part of the South West Ethiopia Peoples' Region.
The Nilotic languages are a group of related languages spoken across a wide area between South Sudan and Tanzania by the Nilotic peoples.
The Eastern Nilotic languages are one of the three primary branches of the Nilotic languages, themselves belonging to the Eastern Sudanic subfamily of Nilo-Saharan; they are believed to have begun to diverge about 3,000 years ago, and have spread southwards from an original home in Equatoria in South Sudan. They are spoken across a large area in East Africa, ranging from Equatoria to the highlands of Tanzania. Their speakers are mostly cattle herders living in semi-arid or arid plains.
The Southern Nilotic languages are spoken mainly in western Kenya and northern Tanzania. They form a division of the larger Nilotic language family, along with the Western Nilotic languages and the Eastern Nilotic languages.
In most classifications, the Eastern Sudanic languages are a group of nine families of languages that may constitute a branch of the Nilo-Saharan language family. Eastern Sudanic languages are spoken from southern Egypt to northern Tanzania.
The Maa languages are a group of closely related Eastern Nilotic languages spoken in parts of Kenya and Tanzania by more than a million speakers. They are subdivided into North and South Maa. The Maa languages are related to the Lotuko languages spoken in South Sudan.
Proto-Afroasiatic (PAA), also known as Proto-Hamito-Semitic, Proto-Semito-Hamitic, and Proto-Afrasian, is the reconstructed proto-language from which all modern Afroasiatic languages are descended. Though estimations vary widely, it is believed by scholars to have been spoken as a single language around 12,000 to 18,000 years ago, that is, between 16,000 and 10,000 BC. Although no consensus exists as to the location of the Afroasiatic homeland, the putative homeland of Proto-Afroasiatic speakers, the majority of scholars agree that it was located within a region of West Asia or Northeast Africa.
The Aroid or Ari-Banna languages possibly belong to the Afro-Asiatic family and are spoken in Ethiopia.
Rendille is an Afro-Asiatic language spoken by the Rendille people inhabiting northern Kenya. It is part of the family's Cushitic branch.
Proto-Berber or Proto-Libyan is the reconstructed proto-language from which the modern Berber languages descend. Proto-Berber was an Afroasiatic language, and thus its descendant Berber languages are cousins to the Egyptian language, Cushitic languages, Semitic languages, Chadic languages, and the Omotic languages.
The Proto-Afroasiatic homeland is the hypothetical place where speakers of the Proto-Afroasiatic language lived in a single linguistic community, or complex of communities, before this original language dispersed geographically and divided into separate distinct languages. Afroasiatic languages are today mostly distributed in parts of Western Asia and North Africa.
Ik is one of the Kuliak languages of northeastern Uganda. The Kuliak languages form their own branch of the proposed Nilo-Saharan language family. With the other two Kuliak languages being moribund, Ik may soon be the sole remaining language of its family.
Nyang'i (Nyangia) is the nearly extinct Kuliak language of the Nyangea hunter-gatherers of northeastern Uganda. The 15,000 Nyangia have shifted to speaking Karamojong.
Proto-Cushitic is the reconstructed proto-language common ancestor of the Cushitic language family. Its words and roots are not directly attested in any written works, but have been reconstructed through the comparative method, which finds regular similarities between languages not explained by coincidence or word-borrowing, and extrapolates ancient forms from these similarities.