Ramarama language

Last updated
Karo
Ramarama
Native to Brazil
Native speakers
210 (2006) [1]
Dialects
  • Arara
  • Uruku
Language codes
ISO 639-3 arr
Glottolog karo1305
ELP Karo (Brazil)

Ramarama, also known as Karo, is a Tupian language of Brazil.

Contents

Unusually for the indigenous languages of South America in general and Tupian in particular, Ramarama is a fairly analytic language, with limited affixation and a strict SOV word order. However, the language also displays complex processes of morphophonological alternation, segmental allophony, and interaction between segmental and suprasegmental phonology.

Setting

The Arara people speak this language, also formally known as Arara but had to be changed in the late 1980s so the language could be distinguished from other languages in the Arara branch by similar Brazilian groups. At one point, Ntogapid, Ramarama, Uruku, Urumi and Ytanga were all thought to be sister languages of Karo. [2] After further study, it was determined that they were all the same language that was classified as different languages during various ethnology work in Brazil. The Karo language is spoken in two villages in Brazil; Iterap and Paygap. These villages are located in the Southern region of the Lourdes Stream Indigenous Land in Rondônia, which is in the central west part of Brazil.

Denny Moore's 2006 summary of indigenous language vitality in Brazil documents that there the Arara people have a population of 184, with most of the population speaking the language and a good transmission rate of the language between generations. [3] Although Portuguese is taught as a second language for contact purposes, the native language is still used for many occasions in daily life. Despite the high level of transmission, their low population puts them at risk of extinction. [4]

History

The Arara people did not have contact with outside groups until around the 1940s. [2] Following Euro-Brazilian contact, their culture has suffered tremendously to the point where it has almost disappeared. [2] Some cultural traditions included a corn harvest festival and secluding children until the time they got married. Although their culture has suffered, many traditions such as rites of passages for marriage and naming children have stayed similar. Other traditions have stayed consistent such as their material culture. The Karo people have a deep history of creating many forms of art such as bracelets, baskets, or clay pots. Furthermore, the Karo speakers were known to interact with surrounding peoples in the areas but it was not until the 1940s when they were contacted by the Indian Protection Services (SPI). [2] Settlers brought over new diseases such as pneumonia, measles and the flu which lead to many indigenous people dying in this time period. Luckily, in the 1960s the Arara people regrouped with a nearby people known as the Gavião where they eventually grew in size. [2] By the mid-1980s, the group was able to find their own village and get federal recognition from local groups.

While the Arara people were severely affected by the colonizers who brought many diseases to their people, there is no documentation on conflicts amongst the colonizers. However, there is documentation of conflicts between two groups of Arara. This conflict was between the main group and another group called the “Black Feet” who spoke a different dialect of the language. [2] The groups often got along but there are documentations of conflicts between the two which turned so violent that some lead in death. Moreover, there are no written material on schools for the Karo people. Most people in the village do speak Arara and Portuguese so it is very likely that most of these community members went to schools outside their village.

Documentation

The earliest documentation of the Karo language was published by German ethnographer Curt Nimuendaju who produced three wordlists from 1925 to 1955, though he referred to the language as Ntogapíd. [5] [6] [7] [8] Several additional wordlists of Karo, listed under different names, were published during the twentieth century as the Karo people came into greater contact with outside groups. [5] These lists were collected by a variety of people for different aims—a few by anthropologists and ethnographers, one commissioned by a Catholic priest and some by members of the Comissão de Linhas Telegráficas Estratégicas de Mato-Grosso ao Amazonas (Commission of Strategic Telegraphic Wires from Mato-Grosso to Amazonas) who aimed to expand the Western borders of Brazil in the mid-twentieth century. [5] In the twenty-first century, two further wordlists have been published, one by Ruth Fonini Monserrat in the year 2000 [9] and the other through a 2004 language documentation project by Nilsen Gabas Jr. [10]

The majority of detailed linguistic descriptions completed on the Karo language was done by Gabas Jr. who wrote his master's thesis on the phonology of Karo before going on to specialize in the language. [11] He published a phonological study in 1989 which covered the segmental and syllabic structures found in Karo as well as the morphophonemic, nasality, accentual, and tonal patterns that emerge. [11] The next year in 1999, Gabas Jr. published his dissertation, a preliminary grammar of Karo which briefly covered the phonetics, phonology and morphology of the language before focusing on the syntax with a detailed explanation of Karo's three grammatical systems. [12] He also has several papers on Karo on specific topics such as evidentials and lexical choice in narratives. [13] [14]

The Endangered Languages Documentation Programme (ELDP) funded a language documentation project coordinated by Gabas Jr. in 2004 for £12,430. [4] Over the course of two years of field work, the project produced a Karo-Portuguese dictionary and amassed 38 videos, 22 audio files and 15 documents displaying a variety of cultural activities including feasts, ceremonies, and collections of common narratives and myths among the Karo people. [10]

Outside of these projects, there has actually been very little to no anthropological data on the Arára people especially around time of contact. The only substantial material published containing a small description of the life of the Arara can be found in anthropological works by French anthropologist, Lévi-Strauss.

Classification

The Karo language belongs to the Tupí stock of Brazilian Indigenous languages which includes up to 10 language families—Karo in particular is a member of the Ramaráma family. [3] In 1964 Aryon Dall’Igna Rodrigues published a classification of the Tupí stock that placed four languages within the Ramaráma family: Ramaráma, Urukú, Urumí and Karo. [15] However, in 2000, Gabas Jr released a detailed comparative analysis of the wordlists published in those languages that challenged these assumptions and concluded that the only language in the Ramaráma language family is Karo. [16] It has been proposed that Karo and another Tupí language Puruborá are both part of a singular Ramaráma-Puruborá language family, however this is controversial. A joint 2015 computational study comparing common word lists in all Tupí languages found minimal support for that theory. [17]

Phonology

Syllable structure

Unlike many Tupian languages, Ramarama allows consonants in the syllable coda, with no restriction of coda consonants compared to onsets. The permissible structures of a monosyllable are therefore V, CV, VC, and CVC. However, only the glottal stop /ʔ/ can occur as a non-word-final coda consonant. Hence the permissible structures of a polysyllabic word is as follows: ...(C)V(ʔ)(C)V(C). Words of more than three syllables are rare.

Consonants

Ramarama has a fairly small consonant inventory, with a wide range of allophonic variation. Notably, the language lacks any fricatives other than /h/, which itself occurs only infrequently. [12]

Bilabial Alveolar Palatal Velar Glottal
Plosive Voiceless p t c k ʔ
Voiced b g
Nasal m n ŋ
Fricative/Trill r h
Approximant w j y

The tap /r/, though not phonetically a stop, is represented as such because it patterns as the voiced equivalent of the stop /t/. This may indicate a historical rhotacism.

Allophony

The voiced stops /b g/ may be lenited to [β ɣ] in the onset of an unstressed syllable and after a vowel: yaba [ˈyaba ~ ˈyaβa] "species of rodent". The palatal stop /c/ may be lenited to [ç] in all circumstances (free variation).

The voiceless stops /p t c k/ are geminated in the onsets of non-initial stressed syllables: itɨ [iˈtːɨ] "deer". They are unreleased in the coda of a word-final syllable: makap [maˈkːap̚] "peanut".

Nasal stops /m n ŋ/ surface as post-stopped nasals [mᵇ nᵈ ŋᶢ] in the onsets of stressed oral syllables: naʔmi [naʔˈmᵇi] "species of wasp". Conversely, they surface as pre-stopped nasals [ᵇm ᵈn ᶢŋ] in the codas of stressed oral syllables: ken [kɛᵈn] "to sleep".

The approximants /w j/ are nasalized [w̃ ȷ̃] before nasal vowels. The tap /r/ is nasalized [r̃] only between two nasal vowels, when the first vowel is stressed (as in the process of nasal spreading discussed below).

Vowels

Ramarama has a large vowel inventory, with seven oral and four nasal vowels:

Front Central Back
High i ĩ ɨ u
Mid e ə o õ
Low a ã

The mid oral vowels /e o/ alternate with low-mid [ɛ ɔ]: syllables with high pitch surface with [e o], while unstressed syllables or those with mid pitch surface with [ɛ ɔ]. Such interaction between tone and vowel quality is cross-linguistically rare. [12] :17

Nasal vowels have a restricted distribution. Nilson Gabas Jr. (1999) writes that "there seems to be just one underlying nasal vowel per word", [12] :33 yet transcribes several examples with more than one nasal vowel that nasal spreading cannot account for (e.g. mãygãra "snake"); this may indicate a nasal spreading rule as yet undescribed, or a freer distribution of nasal vowels than indicated. In any case, nasal vowels also never occur in a penultimate syllable when followed by a voiceless stop in the onset of the final syllable; in other words, sequences of the format /ṼC-VOICEV#/ are disallowed, presumably because such sequences would create a conflict in stress assignment.

Nasal spreading

Like many languages with phonemic nasal vowels, Ramarama displays nasal spreading (nasalization of otherwise non-nasal segments due to proximity to a nasal segment) in some circumstances.

Obligatory rightward nasal spreading occurs when a stressed penultimate nasal vowel is followed by the consonants /r g/ as the onset of a following oral syllable. The following syllable is thus nasalized, and with it the onset consonants (which become [r̃ ŋ]): cẽrat /ˈcẽrat/ "smooth" surfaces as [ˈcẽr̃ə̃t̚].

An optional inward nasal spreading occurs when an oral vowel occurs between two nasal consonants. The vowel may then be nasalized: anana /anana/ "pineapple" may become [anə̃ˈnᵈa].

Stress

Stress is not phonemic in Ramarama, and its placement is mostly fixed to the final syllable. However, the following rules can move stress to the penultimate syllable:

  1. If the final syllable's onset is one of the voiced consonants /b r g/, stress is shifted to the penult: yogo "eel" surfaces as [ˈjɔgɔ], not *[jɔˈgɔ].
  2. Syllables with nasal nuclei, whether beginning with a voiced stop or not, are automatically stressed: ĩya "bird" surfaces as [ˈĩja], while cigã "bone" surfaces as [ciˈgã].
  3. Syllables with high pitch, whether beginning with a voiced stop or not, are likewise automatically stressed: wíup "native, non-domesticated" surfaces as [ˈwí.up̚], while yogá "egg" surfaces as [jɔˈgá]

Tone

Ramarama has a simple system of register pitch accent, in which one syllable per word (the penultimate or final) can be marked by a high pitch. A syllable thus marked is always stressed. Stressed vowels without marked pitch surface phonetically as middle pitch, while unstressed vowels (except those affected by tone spreading) surface as low pitch: parato "armadillo" may be represented phonetically as [pàràˈtːō], while naká "head" may be represented as [nàˈkːá].

Tone spreading occurs when a syllable marked with high or mid pitch occurs in the penultimate syllable and is followed by a voiced segment /b r g w j m n ŋ/ or /Ø/; hence káwan "be fat" surfaces as [káwán], while yaba "species of rodent" surfaces as [ˈjābā]. This process, roughly analogous to the obligatory nasal spreading rule, appears to be the only means by which unstressed syllables can be raised to high or mid pitch.

Sandhi

In continuous speech Ramarama's small consonant inventory is further reduced, and simultaneously complicated, by complex morphophonological processes of assimilation (sandhi). These processes affect the voiceless stops /p t k/ as follows:

Morphology

The morphology of Karo consists of different morphological properties including word classes, affixes, clitics, nominalizations, and compounding. It is a mildly synthetic-fusional language. [12] :38–94 Word classes contain morphemes such as pronouns, verbs, adjectives, etc. — Karo contains a total of nine word classes. Karo has a class of pronouns which include four different types: personal, possessive, interrogative, and demonstrative. Nouns are their own class in Karo though they are not inflected for number, gender or case. They can be combined with clitics and modified by adjectives. The verb class in the language are typically sentence-final and are distinctly categorized into transitive and intransitive categories. Auxiliary class words are similar to intransitive verbs in English, but with little lexical meaning. In Karo, adjectives are considered an open class, meaning they accepts the addition of any new words, and usually appear following the head noun in a noun phrase. Adverbs, unlike adjectives, typically appear at the end or beginning of a clause and are a closed class though manner adverbials, which derive from adjectives and include numerals, are open class. Postpositions form their own phrases and contribute to the sentence as oblique arguments. Particles in Karo, like with many other languages, are defined negatively because they are defined by not being part of any other word class. In Karo, particles are similar to adverbs but less cohesively defined. Finally, the most complex class in Karo is ideophones. Semantically similar to verbs, and morphologically similar to the particles, ideophones are an open class that are not inflectionally marked.

Affixes form morphological processes. There are three inflectional suffixes exist in Karo: -t the first indicative,-p the second indicative, and -a the gerund suffix. In addition, the language contains only six derivational prefixes, five which have specific functions:

  1. ma- the simple causative
  2. ta- the comitative causative
  3. pe- the impersonal passive
  4. to- the reciprocal
  5. mã m- the reflexive

The remaining one pe ʔ- is an optative. Karo is also known for its use of clitics, which are affixes by their distribution. Clitics in this language are typically found within larger constituents than words and Karo in fact contains four: plural marker =to ʔ, adverbializer =tem, a set of personal markers and nominalizer ko=. Lastly, compounding in Karo is quite popular and most morpheme compounds consist of noun + adjective, noun + intransitive verb and noun + noun pairs. All of these elements together compile the basic elements of Karo morphology.

Pronouns

Below are tables listing of the personal and possessive pronouns as well as the personal clitics. Personal pronouns are used in ergative or subject arguments of transitive verbs. The absolutive, or object, pronouns has as separate system of personal clitics which are marked for the argument of intransitive sentences and the patient arguments of transitive sentences. The possessive pronouns are used with alienable nouns.

Free personal pronouns [12] :39
SingularPlural
1st person exclusive õn
inclusive iʔtə
2nd personẽnkaʔto
3rd personattap
feminine ŋa
Possessive pronouns [12] :39
SingularPlural
1st person exclusive watteʔet
inclusive iʔyat
2nd personetkarowat
3rd personattabat
feminine ŋaat
impersonal yat=
referential clitics [12] :81
singularplural
1st personexclusiveo=té=
inclusiveiʔ=
2nd persone=karo=
3rd personaʔ=tap=
feminineŋa=
impersonali=

Examples of pronoun use:

nãn

who

ẽn

2SG

i=top

3IMP=see

nãnẽn i=top

who2SG 3IMP=see

'Who/what did you see?’ [12] :40

wat

1SG.POSS

kaʔa

house

wat kaʔa

1SG.POSS house

‘My house’ [12] :43

ŋa=wé-t

3SG.FEM=cry-IND1

ŋa=wé-t

3SG.FEM=cry-IND1

‘She cried.’ [12] :46

tap=peri-t

3PL=cry-IND1

tap=peri-t

3PL=cry-IND1

‘They cried.’ [12] :46

iʔtə

1PL.INCL

tap

ASSOC

iʔtə tap

1PL.INCL ASSOC

‘ours (things), us’ [12] :44

caropap=tem

sad=ADVZ

kaʔto

2PL

karo=kõna

2PL=EMPH

caropap=tem kaʔto karo=kõna

sad=ADVZ 2PL 2PL=EMPH

‘You (PL) are sad.’ [12] :56

ameko

jaguar

o=top-t

1SG=see-IND1

ameko o=top-t

jaguar 1SG=see-IND1

'The jaguar saw me.' [12] :82

=ken-t

3SG=sleep-IND1

=ken-t

3SG=sleep-IND1

'He slept.' [12] :83

Interrogative

There are the interrogative pronouns:

  1. nãn ‘who, what’
  2. kɨgomət ‘which’

Demonstrative

There are the demonstrative pronouns:

  1. yét ‘that (close to speaker)’
  2. tət ‘that (close to hearer)’
  3. yeket ‘that (far from both)’

Indicatives

The two indicative Karo suffixes, -t, -p have a fine distinction between them. The term ‘indicative’ in the case of Karo is used for lack of a better label and is split into (IND1) -t and (IND2) -p. They have many similarities. Like all the inflectional suffixes, they can only join at the end of verb, auxiliary and copula predicates. In addition, both are used to represent the main statement within a clause. The only difference is the type of statement clauses that they occur in. The first indicative -t is used that are in SOV position. It can appear allomorphically after nasal vowels as /-n/. Conversely, the second indicative -p only appears when one phrase has been moved into focus position. This suffix can appear as /-ap/ after consonants or /-m/ after nasal vowels.

1st indicative2nd indicative

õn

1SG

mãygãra

snake

wĩ-n

kill-IND1

təgana

there

peʔ

LOC

õn mãygãra wĩ-n təgana peʔ

1SG snake kill-IND1 there LOC

‘I killed the snake there.’ [12] :57

təgana

there

peʔ

LOC

õn

1SG

mãygãra

snake

wĩ-m

kill-IND2

təgana peʔ õn mãygãra wĩ-m

there LOC 1SG snake kill-IND2

‘It was there that I killed the snake.’ [12] :60

at

3SG

to=wirup

3R=food

ʔo-t

eat-IND1

cú-tem

big=ADVZ

at to=wirup ʔo-t cú-tem

3SG 3R=food eat-IND1 big=ADVZ

‘He ate his own food a lot.’ [12] :57

cú=tem

big=ADVZ

at

3SG

to=wirup

3R=food

ʔo-p

eat-IND2

cú=tem at to=wirup ʔo-p

big=ADVZ 3SG 3R=food eat-IND2

‘A lot, he ate his own food.’ [12] :57

Nominalization

Entire verbs, verb phrases, and clauses in Karo can be transformed into nouns through three manners: the suffix -ap, the particle kanã and the clitic ko=. The suffix -ap takes transitive and intransitive verbs and yield agentive nominals. It is the only form of nominalization in Karo that does not also utilize the non finite indicating gerund suffix -a. These types of verbs can also be turned into place nouns with the particle kanã. This particle can also be used with the absolutive argument form of ‘to like’ to form actions. The nominalizing clitic ko= works in conjunction with the absolutive argument of ‘to perceive’ to transform whole clauses into nouns.

Examples of nominalization:

ʔo-p

to eat-NOMZ

ʔo-p

{to eat}-NOMZ

‘eater’ [12] :86

o=ker-a

1SG=sleep-GER

kanã

NOMZ

o=ker-a kanã

1SG=sleep-GER NOMZ

‘My place to sleep.’ [12] :87

õn

1SG

aʔ=wĩ-a

3SG=kill-GER

kanã

NOMZ

yaʔti

like

nã-n

COP-IND1

õn aʔ=wĩ-a kanã yaʔti nã-n

1SG 3SG=kill-GER NOMZ like COP-IND1

‘I like to kill it.’ [12] :87

õn

1SG

amɑan

rain

at-a

fall-GER

ko=top-t

NOMZ=see-IND1

õn amɑan at-a ko=top-t

1SG rain fall-GER NOMZ=see-IND1

‘I saw the rain falling.' [12] :89

Syntax

Karo generally follows a relatively strict Subject-Object-Verb (SOV) sentence structure, unless one aspect of the sentence is being focused on. It does not mark for case on nouns, but like many Tupi languages, it follows an ergative-absolutive marking system for pronouns. [12] :viii Karo possesses a system made up of five distinct prefixes all with valency affecting properties.

Valency [12] :63–71

Karo has five derivational prefixes that appear on a verb and change the number of arguments in the a sentence constructions. The five prefixes are as follows:

  1. ma- the simple causative
  2. ta- the comitative causative
  3. pe- the impersonal passive
  4. to- the reciprocal
  5. mãm- the reflexive

With the simple causative, an argument is added. It appears most often with intransitive verbs to indicate an initiator who causes a secondary agent who performs or experiences an action or state.

Examples of the simple causative:

õn

õn

1SG

amaken

aʔ=ma-ket-t

3SG=CAUS-sleep-IND1

õn amaken

õn aʔ=ma-ket-t

1SG 3SG=CAUS-sleep-IND1

‘I made it/him sleep.’ [12] :63

ŋa

ŋa

3SG.FEM

omacopɨn

o=ma-copɨt-t

1SG=CAUS-be.fat-IND1

ŋa omacopɨn

ŋa o=ma-copɨt-t

3SG.FEM 1SG=CAUS-be.fat-IND1

'She made me be fat.' [12] :63

õn

õn

1SG

amapəri

aʔ=ma-pərəp=t

3SG=CAUS-empty-IND1

õn amapəri

õn aʔ=ma-pərəp=t

1SG 3SG=CAUS-empty-IND1

‘I emptied it.’ [12] :64

The comitative causative also occurs mainly with the intransitive but does appear on occasion with transitive verbs. Like the simple causative it indicates an initiator who causes a secondary agent to perform or experience an action or state, but additionally indicates that the initiator is also performing or experiencing that action or state.

Examples of the comitative causative:

wat

wat

1SG.POSS

owã

owã

mother

orakət

o=ta-kə-t

1SG=COM-walk-IND1

wat owã orakət

wat owã o=ta-kə-t

1SG.POSS mother 1SG=COM-walk-IND1

‘My mother made me walk, walking with me.’ [12] :65

õn

õn

1SG

wat

wat

1SG.POSS

owẽ́

owẽ́

baby

raken

ta-ket-t

COM-sleep-IND1

õn wat owẽ́ raken

õn wat owẽ́ ta-ket-t

1SG 1SG.POSS baby COM-sleep-IND1

‘I put my baby to sleep, sleeping with it.’ [12] :66

cãn

cãn

cat

nakəga

ta-kək-a

COM-walk-GER

cãn nakəga

cãn ta-kək-a

cat COM-walk-GER

‘Walk the cat!’ [12] :67

The impersonal passive reduces the number of arguments with transitive sentence constructions. It makes the appearance of any agents in the sentence ungrammatical.

Examples of the impersonal passive:

oyãy

o=yãy

1SG=tooth

bemeŋãn

pe-meŋã-n

IPASS-be.dirty.IND1

oyãy bemeŋãn

o=yãy pe-meŋã-n

1SG=tooth IPASS-be.dirty.IND1

‘My tooth got dirty.’ [12] :68

cĩm

cĩm

meat

memaʔwaba

pe-maʔwap-a

IPASS-fry-GER

cĩm memaʔwaba

cĩm pe-maʔwap-a

meat IPASS-fry-GER

‘The meat got fried.’ [12] :69

abegahmōm

aʔ=pe-kahmōm

3SG=IPASS-be.quiet

nã-a

cop-GER

abegahmōm nã

aʔ=pe-kahmōm nã-a

3SG=IPASS-be.quiet cop-GER

‘It got quiet/calmed down.’ [12] :69

Another valency-reducing prefix in Karo is the reflexive which can be used in both transitive and intransitive verb constructions. With transitives, the reflexive is preceded by a coreferential personal clinic relating it to the subject clause. However, with intransitives, the reflexive and clitic are attached to the dative marker.

Examples of the reflexive:

õn

õn

1SG

omãmnoy

o=mãm-top-t

1SG=REFL-see-IND1

õn omãmnoy

õn o=mãm-top-t

1SG 1SG=REFL-see-IND1

‘I saw myself.’ [12] :69

at

at

3SG

tomãmwĩn

to=mãm-wĩ-n

3R=REFL-kill-IND1

at tomãmwĩn

at to=mãm-wĩ-n

3SG 3R=REFL-kill-IND1

‘He/it killed him/itself.’ [12] :70

owakán

o=waká-n

1SG=be.angry-IND1

omãmkəy

o=mãm-kəy

1SG=REFL-DAT

owakán omãmkəy

o=waká-n o=mãm-kəy

1SG=be.angry-IND1 1SG=REFL-DAT

‘I am angry at myself.’ [12] :70

Finally, the reciprocal prefix is also considered to be valency-reducing and attaches itself to the root of transitive verbs. Like the reflexive, it is always preceded by a coreferential personal clitic that relates to the subject of the clause.

Examples of the reciprocal:

tap

tap

3PL

toroyapít

to=ro-yapí-t

3R-REC-kill-IND1

tap toroyapít

tap to=ro-yapí-t

3PL 3R-REC-kill-IND1

‘They killed each other.’ [12] :70

kaʔto

kaʔto

2PL

karorocapét

karo=ro-capé-t

2PL=REC-beat-IND1

ahyə

ahyə

INTERR

kaʔto karorocapét ahyə

kaʔto karo=ro-capé-t ahyə

2PL 2PL=REC-beat-IND1 INTERR

‘Did you beat each other?’ [12] :71

Semantics [12] :137–144

Tense in Karo is marked analytically. Analytic languages are characterized by unbound morphemes or syntactical constructions. Both past and future tenses are marked by two particles, but future tense also utilizes one auxiliary. However, it is important to note that these markers are not necessary for the language.

Past Tense

There are two particles in Karo. In Karo, particles are used in the past tense to refer to an action or state with the present as a point of reference. These two particles are co and kán. Co refers to actions in the recent or simple past while kán is used for actions that happened a long time ago or past events that relate to myths. Below are examples of co and kán used in everyday Karo language.

púŋ

púŋ

shoot

wet

o=ʔe-t

1SG=AUX-IND1

co

co

PAST

púŋ wet co

púŋ o=ʔe-t co

shoot 1SG=AUX-IND1 PAST

‘I shot.’ [12] :137

In this example, the verb “to shoot” is simple since it only contains a subject and a simple verb. It indicates that the shooting that has been done was recent. Conversely, the particle kán is used in the far past.

toto

toto

grandfather

obetõ

obetõ

3IMP-tell

mɨy

mɫy

long.ago

mãm

mãm

X‍

ŋán

kán

RPAST

toto obetõ mɨymãmŋán

toto obetõ mɫymãmkán

grandfather 3IMP-tell long.agoXRPAST

‘It was grandfather who told (the story) long ago.’ [12] :138

In this example, this particle is only used when describing incidents in the far past. Unlike kán, co can also be used to indicate future occurrences with reference to the past. Here are a few examples of when the future tense uses co and the auxiliaries kap and yat.

war

wat

1SG.POSS

icɨ

icɨ

water

ʔara

ʔat-a

bring-GER

okay

o=kap-t

1SG=AUX.FUT-IND1

co

co

PAST

war icɨ ʔara okayco

wat icɨ ʔat-a o=kap-tco

1SG.POSS water bring-GER 1SG=AUX.FUT-IND1PAST

‘I was going to bring my water.’ [12] :138

iyõm

iyõm

Father

ikap

i=kap=ap

3IMP=AUX.FUT-IND2

towenaoba

to=penaop-a

3R=dance-GER

co

co

PAST

iyõm ikap towenaoba co

iyõm i=kap=ap to=penaop-a co

Father 3IMP=AUX.FUT-IND2 3R=dance-GER PAST

‘Dad was going to dance.’ [12] :138

Both of these case indicate events that could have happened in the near future but didn't in the past tense. In Karo, it is possible to find both past markers in the same clause with co usually appearing before kán. For instance:

ōn

ōn

1SG

opit

o=pi-t

1SG=perforate-IND1

məy

məy

long

mãm

mãm

X‍

co

co

PAST

kán

kán

RPAST

ōn opit məy mãm cokán

ōn o=pi-t məy mãm cokán

1SG 1SG=perforate-IND1 long XPASTRPAST

‘I took the vaccine long ago.’ [12] :139

Here, the phrase “I took the vaccine” takes the co marker and “long ago” will fall under the kán marker.

Future Tense

The future tense can be expressed using an auxiliary or one of two particles: kap, yat, and iga respectively. The auxiliary kap is used to describe situations in the immediate or proximate future. It is usually present in the indicative mood when /-p/ and /-t/ are present.

When constructing these different particles, clauses are a large indicator of which particle can be used. The auxiliary kap covers main actions or events and exists in separate clauses. Usually kap exhibits behaviour evidence of subjects. “The subject of the future auxiliary is always coreferential with the subject of the associated full verb” (140) Thus, all marked verbs include a coreferential proclitic if the verb is intransitive and is omitted if the verb is transitive.

The first type of construction, the intransitive verb can occur in the gerund form followed by a Noun Phrase + AUXILIARY FUTURE, which receives the indicative mood marking.

tokera

to=ket-a

3R=sleep-GER

[maʔwɨt

[maʔwɨt

[man

cú]

cú]

big]

kay

kap-t

AUX.FUT-IND1

tokera [maʔwɨtcú] kay

to=ket-a [maʔwɨtcú] kap-t

3R=sleep-GER [manbig] AUX.FUT-IND1

‘The big man is going to sleep.’ [12] :140

Here, to is attached to the verb with kay being attached in the end which indicates the future conjugation. While in the case below when the case is transitive, a proclitic is attached. Proclitics are a word pronounced with little emphasis, so much so that usually they are shortened and added to the next word. Common examples in English are y’all (you all) and t’was (it was). In these cases, the person of the subject of the future auxiliary, is omitted.

(ø)

(ø)

(ø)

mãygãra

mãygãra

snake

wɪ̃a

wɪ̃-a

kill-GER

[wat

[wat

[1SG.POSS

owẽ]

owẽ]

child]

kay

kap-t

AUX.FUT-IND1

(ø) mãygãra wɪ̃a [watowẽ] kay

(ø) mãygãra wɪ̃-a [watowẽ] kap-t

(ø) snake kill-GER [1SG.POSSchild] AUX.FUT-IND1

‘My son is going to kill a/the snake.’ [12] :141

Furthermore, yat is the second future marker in Karo which primarily focuses on the simple future. Yat typically occurs at the end of a clause since its constructed with the main verb or auxiliary. Here is an example of this in Karo.

ameko

ameko

jaguar

big

yaʔwan

yaʔwat-t

leave.IND1

yat

yat

FUT

ameko cú yaʔwan yat

ameko cú yaʔwat-t yat

jaguar big leave.IND1 FUT

‘The big jaguar will leave.’ [12] :142

Another interesting feature about yat is that it also refers to nouns in noun phrases which is often written as [future N]. A good example is this one mentioned below;

wat

wat

1SG.POSS

kaʔa

kaʔa

house

ʔa

ʔaʔ

CL.RD

yat

yat

FUT

wat kaʔa ʔa yat

wat kaʔa ʔaʔ yat

1SG.POSS house CL.RDFUT

‘My future house’ [12] :143

In addition to noun phrases, yat also present in with the negative particle. Here, the future particle is present before the negative:

ameko

ameko

jaguar

big

yaʔwan

yaʔwat-t

leave.IND1

nyat

yat

FUT

iʔke

iʔke

NEG

ameko cú yaʔwan nyat iʔke

ameko cú yaʔwat-t yat iʔke

jaguar big leave.IND1 FUT NEG

‘The big jaguar will not leave.’ [12] :143

Lastly, iga is the future particle which is used to mark simple future exclusively in negative-interrogative clauses. Unlike yat, iga examples uses the negative taykit. For instance:

taykir

taykir

NEG

at

at

3SG

a?toy

a?=top-t

3SG=see-IND1

iga

iga

FUT

taykir at a?toy iga

taykir at a?=top-t iga

NEG 3SG 3SG=see-IND1 FUT

‘Isn't he going to see it/him?’ [12] :144

Related Research Articles

Goemai is an Afro-Asiatic language spoken in the Great Muri Plains region of Plateau State in central Nigeria, between the Jos Plateau and Benue River. Goemai is also the name of the ethnic group of speakers of the Goemai language. The name 'Ankwe' has been used to refer to the people, especially in older literature and to outsiders. As of 2020, it is estimated that there are around 380,000 Goemai speakers.

Taba is a Malayo-Polynesian language of the South Halmahera–West New Guinea group. It is spoken mostly on the islands of Makian, Kayoa and southern Halmahera in North Maluku province of Indonesia by about 20,000 people.

Sulka is a language isolate of New Britain, Papua New Guinea. In 1991, there were 2,500 speakers in eastern Pomio District, East New Britain Province. Villages include Guma in East Pomio Rural LLG. With such a low population of speakers, this language is considered to be endangered. Sulka speakers had originally migrated to East New Britain from New Ireland.

Futuna-Aniwa is a language spoken in the Tafea Province of Vanuatu on the outlier islands of Futuna and Aniwa. The language has approximately 1,500 speakers. It is a Polynesian language, part of the Austronesian language family.

Manam is a Kairiru–Manam language spoken mainly on the volcanic Manam Island, northeast of New Guinea.

Tamambo, or Malo, is an Oceanic language spoken by 4,000 people on Malo and nearby islands in Vanuatu. It is one of the most conservative Southern Oceanic languages.

Apurinã, or Ipurina, is a Southern Maipurean language spoken by the Apurinã people of the Amazon basin. It has an active–stative syntax. Apurinã is a Portuguese word used to describe the Popikariwakori people and their language. Apurinã indigenous communities are predominantly found along the Purus River, in the Northwestern Amazon region in Brazil, in the Amazonas state. Its population is currently spread over twenty-seven different indigenous lands along the Purus River. with an estimated total population of 9,500 people. It is predicted, however, that fewer than 30% of the Apurinã population can speak the language fluently. A definite number of speakers cannot be firmly determined because of the regional scattered presence of its people. The spread of Apurinã speakers to different regions was initially caused by conflict or disease, which has consequently led natives to lose the ability to speak the language for lack of practice and also because of interactions with other communities.

Roviana is a member of the North West Solomonic branch of Oceanic languages. It is spoken around Roviana and Vonavona lagoons at the north central New Georgia in the Solomon Islands. It has 10,000 first-language speakers and an additional 16,000 people mostly over 30 years old speak it as a second language. In the past, Roviana was widely used as a trade language and further used as a lingua franca, especially for church purposes in the Western Province, but now it is being replaced by the Solomon Islands Pijin. Published studies on Roviana include: Ray (1926), Waterhouse (1949) and Todd (1978) contain the syntax of Roviana. Corston-Oliver discuss ergativity in Roviana. Todd (2000) and Ross (1988) discuss the clause structure in Roviana. Schuelke (2020) discusses grammatical relations and syntactic ergativity in Roviana.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Bangime language</span> Language isolate of southeastern Mali

Bangime is a language isolate spoken by 3,500 ethnic Dogon in seven villages in southern Mali, who call themselves the bàŋɡá–ndɛ̀. Bangande is the name of the ethnicity of this community and their population grows at a rate of 2.5% per year. The Bangande consider themselves to be Dogon, but other Dogon people insist they are not. Bangime is an endangered language classified as 6a - Vigorous by Ethnologue. Long known to be highly divergent from the (other) Dogon languages, it was first proposed as a possible isolate by Blench (2005). Heath and Hantgan have hypothesized that the cliffs surrounding the Bangande valley provided isolation of the language as well as safety for Bangande people. Even though Bangime is not closely related to Dogon languages, the Bangande still consider their language to be Dogon. Hantgan and List report that Bangime speakers seem unaware that it is not mutually intelligible with any Dogon language.

Adang is a Papuan language spoken on the island of Alor in Indonesia. The language is agglutinative. The Hamap dialect is sometimes treated as a separate language; on the other hand, Kabola, which is sociolinguistically distinct, is sometimes included. Adang, Hamap, and Kabola are considered a dialect chain. Adang is endangered as fewer speakers raise their children in Adang, instead opting for Indonesian.

Uyghur is a Turkic language spoken mostly in the west of China.

Farefare or Frafra, also known by the regional name of Gurenne (Gurene), is a Niger–Congo language spoken by the Frafra people of northern Ghana, particularly the Upper East Region, and southern Burkina Faso. It is a national language of Ghana, and is closely related to Dagbani and other languages of Northern Ghana, and also related to Mossi, also known as Mooré, the national language of Burkina Faso.

Paresi is an Arawakan language spoken in Brazil. There are approximately 2000 Paresi people, and around 1800 speak the language. The Paresi live in the state of Mato Grosso, more specifically in nine indigenous territories: Rio Formoso, Utiariti, Estação Parecis, Estivadinho, Pareci, Juininha, Figueira, Ponte de Pedra, and Uirapuru. In terms of endangerment, it is not in immediate danger. It is used in many everyday domains, but there is a lack of transmission to younger generations, as well as an evident language shift to Portuguese. This is a result of Portuguese being used in education and healthcare, as well as the integration of Brazilian culture among the Paresi people, creating changes in their language and cultural practices.

Mavea is an Oceanic language spoken on Mavea Island in Vanuatu, off the eastern coast of Espiritu Santo. It belongs to the North–Central Vanuatu linkage of Southern Oceanic. The total population of the island is approximately 172, with only 34 fluent speakers of the Mavea language reported in 2008.

Tamashek or Tamasheq is a variety of Tuareg, a Berber macro-language widely spoken by nomadic tribes across North Africa in Algeria, Mali, Niger, and Burkina Faso. Tamasheq is one of the three main varieties of Tuareg, the others being Tamajaq and Tamahaq.

Neve’ei, also known as Vinmavis, is an Oceanic language of central Malekula, Vanuatu. There are around 500 primary speakers of Neve’ei and about 750 speakers in total.

Pendau, or Umalasa, is a Celebic language of Sulawesi in Indonesia spoken by the approximately 4000 Pendau people who live in Central Sulawesi. Classified as an endangered language, Pendau is primarily spoken inside of Pendau villages whereas Indonesian is used to speak with neighboring communities and is the language of children's education and outside officials. The highest concentration of speakers is in and around Kecamatan Balaesang. There are no known dialects within the Pendau region, although speakers from the mainland can identify whether a speaker is from the Balaesang peninsula through their 'rhythm' or intonation pattern. In recent years, some Pendau leaders have worked with local government to preserve their language alongside Indonesian.

Zoogocho Zapotec, or Diža'xon, is a Zapotec language of Oaxaca, Mexico.

Longgu (Logu) is a Southeast Solomonic language of Guadalcanal, but originally from Malaita.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Tsʼixa language</span> Khoe language of Botswana

Tsʼixa is a critically endangered African language that belongs to the Kalahari Khoe branch of the Khoe-Kwadi language family. The Tsʼixa speech community consists of approximately 200 speakers who live in Botswana on the eastern edge of the Okavango Delta, in the small village of Mababe. They are a foraging society that consists of the ethnically diverse groups commonly subsumed under the names "San", "Bushmen" or "Basarwa". The most common term of self-reference within the community is Xuukhoe or 'people left behind', a rather broad ethnonym roughly equaling San, which is also used by Khwe-speakers in Botswana. Although the affiliation of Tsʼixa within the Khalari Khoe branch, as well as the genetic classification of the Khoisan languages in general, is still unclear, the Khoisan language scholar Tom Güldemann posits in a 2014 article the following genealogical relationships within Khoe-Kwadi, and argues for the status of Tsʼixa as a language in its own right. The language tree to the right presents a possible classification of Tsʼixa within Khoe-Kwadi:

References

  1. Karo at Ethnologue (18th ed., 2015) (subscription required)
  2. 1 2 3 4 5 6 Gabas, Nilson. "Karo - Indigenous Peoples of Brazil". Povos Indígenas No Brasil.
  3. 1 2 Moore, Denny. "Brazil: Language Situation". The Encyclopedia of Language & Linguistics: 117–128.
  4. 1 2 “Karo.” Endangered Language Documentation Programme online, https://www.eldp.net/en/our+projects/projects+list/
  5. 1 2 3 Gabas Jr., Genetic relationship within the Ramaráma family of the Tupí stock (Brazil)
  6. Nimuendajú, Curt, “As Tribus do Alto Madeira.” Journal de la Société des AméricanistesXVII (1925): 137-172.
  7. Nimuendajú, Curt, “Wortlisten aus Amazonien.” Journal de la Société des AméricanistesXXIV (1932): 93-119.
  8. Nimuendajú, Curt, “Reconhecimento dos rios Içána, Ayarí, e Uaupés, março a julho de 1927: Apontamentos linguísticos,” Journal de la Société des Américanistes44 (1955): 149-178.
  9. Monserrat, Ruth Fonini, Vocabulário Amondawa-Português, [etc.], Caixas do Sul: Universidade do Caixas do Sul, 2000.
  10. 1 2 “Documentation and Description of Karo, Brazil,” Endangered Language Archive at SOAS University of London, http://elar.soas.ac.uk/desposit/0206
  11. 1 2 Gabas 1989.
  12. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 Gabas 1999.
  13. Gabas, Jr., Nilson. 2001. Evidenciais em Karo. In A.S.A.C. Cabral and Aryon D. Rodrigues (eds.), Línguas indígenas brasileiras. Fonologia, gramática e história. Atas do I Encontro Internacional do GTLI da ANPOLL, I, 254-268. Belém: UFPA.
  14. Gabas, Jr., Nilson. 2001. Lexical choice in Karo narratives. Delta 17.
  15. Rodrigues, Aryon Dall'Igna, Arnaldo Hauptmann, and Thekla Hartmann, "A CLASSIFICAÇÃO DO TRONCO LINGÜÍSTICO TUPÍ," Revista De Antropologia12, no. 1/2 (1964): 103, JSTOR   41615767
  16. Gabas Jr., Nilson, "Genetic relationship within the Ramaráma family of the Tupí stock (Brazil)," Indigenous languages of lowland South America(2000): 80-82,http://etnolinguistica.wdfiles.com/local--files/illa:vol1n6/illa_vol1n6_gabas.pdf
  17. Ana Vilacy Galucio & al., “Genealogical relations and lexical distances within the Tupian linguistic family,” Boletim do Museu Paraense Emílio Goeldi. Ciências Humanas 10, no. 2 (2015): 229-274. doi : 10.1590/1981-81222015000200004