Wichita is a Caddoan language spoken in Anadarko, Oklahoma by the Wichita and Affiliated Tribes. The last fluent heritage speaker, Doris Lamar-McLemore, died in 2016,[2] although in 2007 there were three first-language speakers alive.[3] This has rendered Wichita functionally extinct; however, the tribe offers classes to revitalize the language[4] and works in partnership with the Wichita Documentation Project of the University of Colorado, Boulder.[5]
When the Europeans began to settle North America, Wichita separated into three dialects; Waco, Tawakoni, and Kirikirʔi꞉s (aka, Wichita Proper).[3] However, when the language was threatened and the number of speakers decreased, dialect differences largely disappeared.[6]
Status
As late as 2007 there were three living native speakers,[7] but the last known fluent native speaker, Doris Lamar-McLemore, died on 30 August 2016. This is a sharp decline from the 500 speakers estimated by Paul L. Garvin in 1950.[8]
Classification
Wichita is a member of the Caddoan language family, along with modern Caddo, Pawnee, Arikara, and Kitsai.[3]
Phonology
The phonology of Wichita is unusual, with no pure labial consonants (though there are two labiovelars /kʷ/ and /w/). There is only one nasal (depending on conflicting theory one or more nasal sounds may appear, but all theories seem to agree that they are allophones of the same phoneme, at best), and possibly a three vowel system using only height for contrast.[7]
Consonants
Wichita has 10 consonants. In the Americanist orthography generally used when describing Wichita, /t͡s/ is spelled ⟨c⟩, and /j/ is ⟨y⟩.
Though neither Rood nor Garvin include nasals in their respective consonant charts for Wichita, Rood's later inclusion of nasals in phonetic transcription for his 2008 paper ("Some Wichita Recollections: Aspects of Culture Reflected in Language") support the appearance of at least /n/.[3]
Labials are generally absent, occurring in only two roots: kammacto grind corn and camma:cito hoe, to cultivate (⟨c⟩ = /t͡s/).
Apart from the /m/ in these two verbs, nasals are allophonic. The allophones [ɾ] and [n] are in complementary distribution: It is [n] before alveolars (/t,ts,s/ and in geminate [nn]) and initially before a vowel, and [ɾ] elsewhere. Thus its initial consonant clusters are [n] and [ɾ̥h], and its medial & final clusters are [nts],[nt],[ns],[nn],[ɾʔ],[ɾh].
Final r and w are voiceless: [ɾ̥],[w̥]
Glottalized final consonants: One aspect of Wichita phonetics is the occurrence of glottalized final consonants. Taylor asserts that when a long vowel precedes a glottal stop (ʔ), there is no change to the pronunciation. However, when the glottal stop is preceded by a short vowel, the vowel is eliminated. If the short vowel was preceded by a consonant, then the consonant is glottalized. Taylor hypothesizes that these glottalized final consonants show that the consonant was not originally a final consonant, that the proto form (an earlier language from which Wichita split off, that Taylor was aiming to reconstruct in his paper) ended in a glottal stop, and that a vowel has been lost between the consonant and glottal stop.[6]
Original word ending
Change
Result
Wichita example
[Vːʔ#]
No change
[Vːʔ#]
[VːVʔ#]
-[V]
[Vːʔ#]
[hijaːʔ] (snow)
[CVʔ#]
-[V]
[Cʔ#]
[kiːsʔ] (bone)
Vː - long vowel
V - short vowel
C - consonant
# - preceding sound ends word
Taylor also finds that previous phonetic transcriptions have recorded the phoneme /ts/ (aka ⟨c⟩), as occurring after /i/, while /s/ is recorded when preceded by /a/.[6]
The *kʷ,*w,*p merger; or Why Wichita Has No /p/:
In Wichita the sounds /kʷ/ and /w/ are not differentiated when they begin a word, and word-initial *p has become /w/. This is unusual, in that the majority of Caddoan languages pronounce words that used to begin with *w with /p/. In Wichita, the three sounds were also merged when preceded by a consonant. Wichita shifted consonant initial *p to /kʷ/ with other medial occurrences of *p. /kʷ/ and /w/ remain distinct following a vowel. For example, the word for 'man' is /wiːt͡s/ in Wichita, but /piːta/ in South Band Pawnee and /pita/ in Skiri Pawnee.[6]
Phonological rules
The coalescence of morpheme-final /ɾ/ and subsequent morpheme-initial /t/ or /s/ to /t͡s/:
ti-r-tar-s
IND-PL-cut-IMPERF
→ ticac
ti-r-tar-s
IND-PL-cut-IMPERF
'he cut them'
a:ra-r-tar
PERF-PL-cut
→ a:racar
a:ra-r-tar
PERF-PL-cut
'he has cut them'
a:ra-tar
PERF-cut
→ a:ratar
a:ra-tar
PERF-cut
'he has cut it'
/w/ changes to /kʷ/ whenever it follows a consonantal segment which is not /k/ or /kʷ/:
i-s-wa
IMP-you-go
→ iskwa
i-s-wa
IMP-you-go
'go!'
i-t-wa
IMP-I-go
→ ickwa
i-t-wa
IMP-I-go
'let me go!'
/ɾ/ changes to /h/ before /k/ or /kʷ/. The most numerous examples involve the collective-plural prefix r- before a morpheme beginning with /k/:
ti-r-kita-re:sʔi
IND-COL-top-lie.INAN
→ tihkitare:sʔi
ti-r-kita-re:sʔi
IND-COL-top-lie.INAN
'they are lying on top'
/t/ with a following /s/ or /ɾ/ to give /t͡s/:
keʔe-t-rika:s-ti:kwi
FUT-I-head-hit
→ keʔecika:sti:kwi
keʔe-t-rika:s-ti:kwi
FUT-I-head-hit
'I will hit him on the head'
/t/ changes to /t͡s/ before /i/ or any non-vowel:
ta-t-r-taʔas
IND-I-COL-bite
→ taccaʔas
ta-t-r-taʔas
IND-I-COL-bite
'I bit them'
/k/ changes to /s/ before /t/:
ti-ʔak-tariyar-ic
IND-PL-cut.randomly-repeatedly
→ taʔastariyaric
ti-ʔak-tariyar-ic
IND-PL-cut.randomly-repeatedly
'he butchered them'
/ɾ/, /j/, and /h/ change to /s/ after /s/ or /t͡s/:
Though Rood employs the letter ⟨o⟩ in his transcriptions,[3] Garvin instead uses ⟨u⟩, and asserts that /u/ is a separate phoneme.[8] However, considering the imprecision in vowel sound articulation, what is likely important about these transcriptions is that they attest to a back vowel that is not low.
Taylor uses Garvin's transcription in his analysis, but theorizes a shift of *u to /i/ medially in Wichita, but does not have enough examples to fully analyze all the possible environments. He also discusses a potential shift from *a to /i/, but again, does not have enough examples to develop a definitive hypothesis. Taylor finds /ɛ/ only occurs with intervocalic glottal stops.[6][8]
Rood argues that [o] is not phonemic, as it is often equivalent to any vowel + /w/ + any vowel. For example, /awa/ is frequently contracted to [óː] (the high tone is an effect of the elided consonant). There are relatively few cases where speakers will not accept a substitution of vowel + /w/ + vowel for [o]; one of them is [kóːs] 'eagle'.[clarification needed]
Rood also proposes that, with three vowels that are arguably high, mid, and low, the front-back distinction is not phonemic, and that one may therefore speak of a 'vertical' vowel inventory (see below). This also has been claimed for relatively few languages, such as the Northwest Caucasian languages and the Ndu languages of Papua New Guinea.
There is clearly at least a two-way contrast in vowel length. Rood proposes that there is a three-way contrast, which is quite rare among the world's languages, although well attested for Mixe, and probably present in Estonian. However, in Wichita, for each of the three to four vowels qualities, one of the three lengths is rare, and in addition the extra-long vowels frequently involve either an extra morpheme, or suggest that prosody may be at work. For example,
nɪːt͡s.híːːʔɪh 'the strong one'
nɪːːt͡s.híːːʔɪh 'the strong ones'
hɛːhɪɾʔíːɾas 'let him find you'
hɛːːhɪɾʔíːɾas 'let him find it for you'
háɾah 'there'
háːɾɪh 'here it is' (said when handing something over)
háːːɾɪh 'that one'
(Note that it is common in many languages to use prosodic lengthening with demonstratives such as 'there' or 'that'.)[7]
This contrasts with Mixe, where it is easy to find a three-way length contrast without the addition of morphemes.[7]
Under Rood's analysis, then, Wichita has 9 phonemic vowels:[7]
There is also a contrastive high tone, indicated here by an acute accent.
Syllable and phonotactics
While vowel clusters are uncommon (unless the extra-long vowels are clusters), consonant clusters are ubiquitous in Wichita. Words may begin with clusters such as [kskh] (kskhaːɾʔa) and [ɾ̥h] (ɾ̥hintsʔa). The longest cluster noted in Wichita is five consonants long, counting [ts] as a single consonant /c/: /nahiʔinckskih/ 'while sleeping'. However, Wichita syllables are more commonly CV or CVC.
Grammar and morphology
Wichita is an agglutinative, polysynthetic language, meaning words have a root verb basis to which information is added; that is, morphemes (affixes) are added to verb roots. These words may contain subjects, objects, indirect objects, and possibly indicate possession. Thus, surprisingly complex ideas can be communicated with as little as one word. For example, /kijaʔaːt͡ssthirʔaːt͡s/ means "one makes himself a fire".[3]
Nouns do not distinguish between singular and plural, as this information is specified as part of the verb. Wichita also does not distinguish between genders, which can be problematic for English language translation.[3]
Sentence structure is much more fluid than in English, with words being organized according to importance or novelty. Often the subject[clarification needed] of the sentence is placed initially. Linguist David S. Rood, who has written many papers concerning the Wichita language, recorded this example, as spoken by Bertha Provost (a native speaker, now deceased) in the late 1960s.[3]
Old.time.people God When.he.made.us.dwell Earth This Where.it.is.located
"When God put our ancestors on this earth."
The subject[clarification needed] of the sentence is ancestors, and thus the sentence begins with it, instead of God, or creation (when.he.made.us.dwell). This leads one to conclude Wichita has a largely free word-order, where parts of the sentence do not need to be located next to each other to be related.[3]
The perfective tense demonstrates that an act has been completed; on the other hand, the intentive tense indicates that a subject plans or planned to carry out a certain act. The habitual aspect indicates a habitual activity, for example: "he smokes" but not "he is smoking." Durative tense describes an activity, which is coextensive with something else.
Wichita has no indirect speech or passive voice. When using past tense, speakers must indicate if this knowledge of the past is based in hearsay or personal knowledge. Wichita speakers also use a morpheme which amounts to two versions of "we"; one that includes the listener, and one that does not. Wichita also differentiates between singular, dual and plural number, instead of the simpler singular or plural designations commonly found.[3]
[10] The suffix is Rá:hir, added to the base. Another means of expressing instrument, used only for body parts, is a characteristic position of incorporation in the verb complex.
ha:rhiwi:cá:hir 'using a bowl' (ha:rhiwi:c 'bowl')
ika:rá:hir 'with a rock' (ika:ʔa 'rock')
kirikirʔi:sá:hir 'in Wichita (the language)' (kirikirʔi:s 'Wichita)
iskiʔo:rʔeh 'hold me in your arms' (iskiʔ 'imperative 2nd subject, 1st object'; a 'reflexive possessor'; ʔawir 'arm'; ʔahi 'hold').
keʔese:cʔíriyari 'you will shake your head' (keʔes 'future 2nd subject'; a 'reflexive possessor'; ic 'face'; ʔiriyari 'go around'. Literally: 'you will go around, using your face').
Note: kara (ought), alone, always means 'subject should', but in complex constructions it is used for hypothetical action, as in 'what would you do if...')
The directive inflection is used in giving directions in sequences, such as describing how one makes something.
This occurs only with 2nd or 3rd person subject pronouns and only in the singular.
The optative is usually translated 'I wish' or 'subject should'.
Although ought seems to imply that the action is the duty of the subject, it is frequently used for hypothetical statements in complex constructions.
The unit durative suggests that the beginning and ending of the event are unimportant, or that the event is coextensive with something else.
Indicative is the name of the most commonly used Wichita inflection translating English sentences out of context. It marks predication as a simple assertion. The time is always non-future, the event described is factual, and the situation is usually one of everyday conversation.
The prefix is ti- with 3rd persons and ta- otherwise
The aorist is used in narratives, stories, and in situations where something that happened or might have happened relatively far in the past is meant.
The future may be interpreted in the traditional way. It is obligatory for any event in the future, no matter how imminent, unless the event is stated to be part of someone's plans, in which case intentive is used instead.
The perfect implies recently completed.
It makes the fact of completion of activity definite, and specifies an event in the recent past.
The aorist intentive means 'I heard they were going to ... but they didn't.'
The indicative intentive means 'They are going to ... ' without implying anything about the evidence on which the statement is based, nor about the probability of completion.
The optional inflection quotative occurs with the aorist, future, or perfect tenses.
If it occurs, it specifies that the speaker's information is from some source other than personal observation or knowledge.
'I heard that ... ' or 'I didn't know, but ... '
If it does not occur, the form unambiguously implies that evidence for the report is personal observation.
[10] In the Wichita language, there are only case markings for obliques. Here are some examples:
Instrumental case
The suffix Rá:hir, added to the base
Another means of expressing instrument, used only for body parts, is a characteristic position of incorporation in the verb complex
ha:rhiwi:cá:hir 'using a bowl' (ha:rhiwi:c 'bowl')
ika:rá:hir 'with a rock' (ika:ʔa 'rock')
Locative case
Most nouns take a locative suffix kiyah:
ika:kíyah
ika:ʔa
rock
-kiyah
LOC
ika:ʔa -kiyah
rock LOC
'where the rock is'
But a few take the verbal -hirih:
hánnhirh
hir-ahrʔa
ground
-hirih
LOC
hir-ahrʔa -hirih
ground LOC
'on the ground'
Any verbal participle (i.e. any sentence) can be converted to a locative clause by the suffix -hirih
tihe:ha 'it is a creek'
nahe:hárih 'where the creek is'
Predicates and arguments
Wichita is a polysynthetic language. Almost all the information in any simple sentence is expressed by means of bound morphemes in the verb complex. The only exception to this are (1) noun stems, specifically those functioning as agents of transitive verbs but sometimes those in other functions as well, and (2) specific modifying particles. A typical sentence from a story is the following:[11]
squirrel {} QUOT AOR PVB {big (quantity)} meat COL PORT top come REP IPFV {} PTCP wood COL {be upright} LOC
'The squirrel, by making many trips, carried the large quantity of meat up into the top of the tree, they say.'
Note that squirrel is the agent and occurs by itself with no morphemes indicating number or anything else. The verb, in addition to the verbal units of quotative, aorist, repetitive, and imperfective, also contain morphemes that indicate the agent is singular, the patient is collective, the direction of the action is to the top, and all the lexical information about the whole patient noun phrase, "big quantity of meat."
Gender
In the Wichita language, there is no gender distinction (WALS).
Person and possession
Subjective
Objective
1st person
-t-
-ki-
2nd person
-s-
-a:-
3rd person
-i-
Ø
inclusive
-ciy-
-ca:ki-
The verb 'have, possess' in Wichita is /uR ... ʔi/, a combination of the preverb 'possessive' and the root 'be'. Possession of a noun can be expressed by incorporating that noun in this verb and indicating the person of the possessor by the subject pronoun:[12][13]
natí:ʔakʔih
na-
PTCP
t-
1.SBJ
uR-
POSS
ʔak-
wife
ʔi-
be
h
SUBORD
na- t- uR- ʔak- ʔi- h
PTCP 1.SBJ POSS wife be SUBORD
'my wife'
niye:s natí:kih
niye:s
child
na-
PTCP
t-
1.SBJ-
uR-
POSS
ʔiki-
be.PL
h
SUBORD
niye:s na- t- uR- ʔiki- h
child PTCP 1.SBJ- POSS be.PL SUBORD
'my children'
Number marking
Nouns can be divided into those that are countable and those that are not. In general, this correlates with the possibility for plural marking: Countable nouns can be marked for dual or plural; if not so marked, they are assumed to be singular. Uncountable nouns cannot be pluralized.
Those uncountable nouns that are also liquids are marked as such by a special morpheme, kir.
ta:tí:sa:skinnaʔas
ta
IND
i
3.SBJ
a:
PVB
ti:sa:s
medicine
kir
liquid
ri
PORT
ʔa
come
s
IPFV
ta i a: ti:sa:s kir ri ʔa s
IND 3.SBJ PVB medicine liquid PORT come IPFV
'He is bringing (liquid) medicine'
Those incountable nouns that are not liquid are not otherwise marked in Wichita. This feature is labeled dry mass. Forms such as ye:c 'fire', kirʔi:c 'bread', and ka:hi:c 'salt' are included in this category.
tà:yè:csàʔas
ta
IND
i
3.SBJ
a:
PVB
ya:c
fire
ri
PORT
ʔa
come
s
IPFV
ta i a: ya:c ri ʔa s
IND 3.SBJ PVB fire PORT come IPFV
'He is bringing fire.'
ta:ká:hi:csaʔas
ta
IND
i
3.SBJ
a:
PVB
ka:hi:c
salt
ri
PORT
ʔa
come
s
IPFV
ta i a: ka:hi:c ri ʔa s
IND 3.SBJ PVB salt PORT come IPFV
'He is bringing salt.'
Wichita countable nouns are divided into those that are collective and those that are not. The collective category includes most materials, such as wood; anything that normally comes in pieces, such as meat, corn, or flour; and any containers such as pots, bowls, or sacks when they are filled with pieces of something.
ta:rássaraʔas
ta
IND
i
3.SBJ
a:
PVB
aʔas
meat
ra
COL
ri
PORT
ʔa
come
s
IPFV
ta i a: aʔas ra ri ʔa s
IND 3.SBJ PVB meat COL PORT come IPFV
'He is bringing meat.'
ta:rássaʔas
ta
IND
i
3.SBJ
a:
PVB
aʔas
meat
ri
PORT
ʔa
come
s
IPFV
ta i a: aʔas ri ʔa s
IND 3.SBJ PVB meat PORT come IPFV
'He is bringing (one piece of) meat.'
Some of the noncollective nominals are also marked for other selectional restrictions. In particular, with some verbs, animate nouns (including first and second person pronouns) require special treatment when they are patients in the sentence. Whenever there is an animate patient or object of certain verbs such as u...raʔa 'bring' or irasi 'find', the morpheme |hiʔri|(/hirʔ/, /hiʔr/, /hirʔi/) also occurs with the verb. The use of this morpheme is not predictable by rule and must be specified for each verb in the language that requires it.
tí:rass
ta
IND
i
3.SBJ
irasi
find
s
IPFV
ta i irasi s
IND 3.SBJ find IPFV
'He found it (inanimate).'
tihirʔí:rass
ta
IND
i
3.SBJ
hirʔi
patient is animate
irasi
find
s
IPFV
ta i hirʔi irasi s
IND 3.SBJ {patient is animate} find IPFV
'He found it (animate).'
Like hiʔri 'patient is animate', the morpheme wakhahr, means 'patient is an activity'.
Countable nouns that are neither animate nor activities, such as chairs, apples, rocks, or body parts, do not require any semantic class agreement morphemes in the surface grammar of Wichita.
The morpheme |ra:k| marks any or all non-third persons in the sentence as plural.
The morpheme for 'collective' or 'patient is not singular'. The shape of this varies from verb to verb, but the collective is usually |ru|, |ra|, or |r|.
The noncollective plural is usually |ʔak|. Instead of a morpheme here, some roots change form to mark plural. Examples include:
Word
Singular
Plural
cook
ʔarasi
wa:rasʔi:rʔ
eat
kaʔac
ʔa
kill
ki
ʔessa
A surface structure object in the non-third-person category can be clearly marked as singular, dual, or plural. The morpheme ra:k marks plurality; a combination oh hi and ʔak marks dual. Singular is marked by zero.
If both agent and patient are third person, a few intransitive verbs permit the same distinctions for patients as are possible for non-third objects: singular, dual, and plural. These verbs (such as 'come' and 'sit') allow the morpheme wa to mark 'dual patient'. In all other cases the morphemes ru, ra, r, or ʔak means 'patient is plural'.
|hi| subject is nonsingular
|ʔak| third person patient is nonsingular
|ra:k| non-third-person is plural. If both the subject and object are non-third person, reference is to the object only.
According to the Ethnologue Languages of the World website, the Wichita language is "dormant", meaning that no one has more than symbolic proficiency.[14] The last native speaker of the Wichita language, Doris Jean Lamar McLemore, died in 2016. The reason for the language's decline is because the speakers of the Wichita language switched to speaking English. Thus, children were not being taught Wichita and only the elders knew the language. "Extensive efforts to document and preserve the language" are in effect through the Wichita Documentation Project.
Revitalization efforts
The Wichita and Affiliated Tribes offered language classes, taught by Doris McLemore and Shirley Davilla.[4] The tribe created an immersion class for children and a class for adults. Linguist David Rood has collaborated with Wichita speakers to create a dictionary and language CDs.[15] The tribe is collaborating with Rood of the University of Colorado, Boulder to document and teach the language through the Wichita Documentation Project.[5]
Niuean is a Polynesian language, belonging to the Malayo-Polynesian subgroup of the Austronesian languages. It is most closely related to Tongan and slightly more distantly to other Polynesian languages such as Māori, Samoan, and Hawaiian. Together, Tongan and Niuean form the Tongic subgroup of the Polynesian languages. Niuean also has a number of influences from Samoan and Eastern Polynesian languages.
The Arapaho (Arapahoe) language is one of the Plains Algonquian languages, closely related to Gros Ventre and other Arapahoan languages. It is spoken by the Arapaho of Wyoming and Oklahoma. Speakers of Arapaho primarily live on the Wind River Indian Reservation in Wyoming, though some have affiliation with the Cheyenne living in western Oklahoma.
Wintu is a Wintu language which was spoken by the Wintu people of Northern California. It was the northernmost member of the Wintun family of languages. The Wintun family of languages was spoken in the Shasta County, Trinity County, Sacramento River Valley and in adjacent areas up to the Carquinez Strait of San Francisco Bay. Wintun is a branch of the hypothetical Penutian language phylum or stock of languages of western North America, more closely related to four other families of Penutian languages spoken in California: Maiduan, Miwokan, Yokuts, and Costanoan.
The Natchez language is the ancestral language of the Natchez people who historically inhabited Mississippi and Louisiana, and who now mostly live among the Muscogee and Cherokee peoples in Oklahoma. The language is considered to be either unrelated to other indigenous languages of the Americas or distantly related to the Muskogean languages.
The grammar of Classical Nahuatl is agglutinative, head-marking, and makes extensive use of compounding, noun incorporation and derivation. That is, it can add many different prefixes and suffixes to a root until very long words are formed. Very long verbal forms or nouns created by incorporation, and accumulation of prefixes are common in literary works. New words can thus be easily created.
Tauya is a Rai Coast language spoken in the Ramu River valley, Madang Province, Papua New Guinea by approximately 350 people. The Linguistics Department at the University of Manitoba in Winnipeg, Canada, has Tauya language resources.
Aʼingae, commonly known as Cofán or Kofán, is the primary language of the Aʼi (Cofán) people, an indigenous group whose ancestral territory lies at the interface between the Andean foothills and Amazonia in the northeast of Ecuador and southern Colombia.
Apma is the language of central Pentecost island in Vanuatu. Apma is an Oceanic language. Within Vanuatu it sits between North Vanuatu and Central Vanuatu languages, and combines features of both groups.
Misantla Totonac, also known as Yecuatla Totonac and Southeastern Totonac, is an indigenous language of Mexico, spoken in central Veracruz in the area between Xalapa and Misantla. It belongs to the Totonacan family and is the southernmost variety of Totonac. Misantla Totonac is highly endangered, with fewer than 133 speakers, most of whom are elderly. The language has largely been replaced by Spanish.
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.
The Nukak language is a language of uncertain classification, perhaps part of the macrofamily Puinave-Maku. It is very closely related to Kakwa.
Baiso or Bayso is a Lowland East Cushitic language belonging to the Omo–Tana subgroup, and is spoken in Ethiopia, in the region around Lake Abaya.
Tundra Nenets is a Uralic language spoken in European Russia and North-Western Siberia. It is the largest and best-preserved language in the Samoyedic group.
Pech or Pesh is a Chibchan language spoken in Honduras. It was formerly known as Paya, and continues to be referred to in this manner by several sources, though there are negative connotations associated with this term. It has also been referred to as Seco. There are 300 speakers according to Yasugi (2007). It is spoken near the north-central coast of Honduras, in the Dulce Nombre de Culmí municipality of Olancho Department.
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.
Yawalapiti (Jaulapiti) is an Arawakan language of Brazil. The Agavotaguerra (Agavotoqueng) reportedly spoke the same language. Speakers of the language live in a village along the edge of the river Tuatuari, a tributary of the Kuluene River, located in the southern part of the Xingu Indigenous Park, in the state of Mato Grosso.
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.
Wamesa is an Austronesian language of Indonesian New Guinea, spoken across the neck of the Doberai Peninsula or Bird's Head. There are currently 5,000–8,000 speakers. While it was historically used as a lingua franca, it is currently considered an under-documented, endangered language. This means that fewer and fewer children have an active command of Wamesa. Instead, Papuan Malay has become increasingly dominant in the area.
Matlatzinca, or more specifically San Francisco Matlatzinca, is an endangered Oto-Manguean language of Western Central Mexico.[3] The name of the language in the language itself is pjiekak'joo.[4] The term "Matlatzinca" comes from the town's name in Nahuatl, meaning "the lords of the network." At one point, the Matlatzinca groups were called "pirindas," meaning "those in the middle."[5]
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
Garvin, Paul L. (1950). "Wichita I: Phonemics". International Journal of American Linguistics. 16 (4): 179–184. doi:10.1086/464086. S2CID143828845.
Rood, David S. (1975). "The Implications of Wichita Phonology". Language. 51 (2): 315–337. doi:10.2307/412858. JSTOR412858.
Rood, David S. (2008). "Some Wichita Recollections: Aspects of Culture Reflected in Language". Plains Anthropologist. 53 (208): 395–405. doi:10.1179/pan.2008.029. S2CID143889526.
Taylor, Allan R. (1963). "Comparative Caddoan". International Journal of American Linguistics. 29 (2): 113–131. doi:10.1086/464725. S2CID224809647.
Rood, David S. (1973). "Aspects of subordination in Lakhota and Wichita". In Corum, Claudia; Smith-Stark, T. Cedric; Weiser, Ann (eds.). You Take the High Node and I'll Take the Low Node: Papers from the Comparative Syntax Festival, the Differences between Main and Subordinate Clauses. Chicago: Chicago Linguistics Society. pp.71–88. LCCN73085640.
Rood, David S. (1975b). "Wichita verb structure: Inflectional categories". In Crawford, James M. (ed.). Studies in Southeastern Indian Languages. Athens: University of Georgia Press. pp.121–134. ISBN978-0-8203-0334-5.
Rood, David S. (1998). "'To be' in Wichita". In Hinton, Leanne; Munro, Pamela (eds.). Studies in American Indian Languages: Description and Theory. Berkeley: University of California Press. pp.190–196. ISBN978-0-520-09789-6. LCCN98023535.
Rood, David S. (2015) [1977]. "Wichita texts". International Journal of American Linguistics. Native American Texts Series. 2 (1): 91–128. ISBN9780226343914.
Schmitt. (1950).
Schmitt, Karl; Schmitt, Iva Ósanai (1952). Wichita kinship past and present. Norman, OK: University Book Exchange. LCCN54000195.
Schoolcraft, Henry. (1851–1857). Historical and statistical information respecting the history, condition, and prospects of the Indian tribes of the US. Philadelphia: Lippincott, Grambo.
Schoolcraft, Henry. (1953). (pp.709–711).
Spier, Leslie (1924). "Wichita and Caddo relationship terms". American Anthropologist. 26 (2): 258–263. doi:10.1525/aa.1924.26.2.02a00080.
Vincent, Nigel (1978). "A note on natural classes and the Wichita consonant system". International Journal of American Linguistics. 44 (3): 230–232. doi:10.1086/465549. S2CID145000151.
Whipple (1856). Reports of explorations and surveys to ascertain the most practicable and economic route for a railroad from the Mississippi River to the Pacific Ocean (Report). Washington: War Department. pp.65–68. (Information on the Waco dialect)
† extinct language / ≠ extinct tribe / >< early, obsolete name of Indigenous tribe / ° people absorbed into other tribe(s) / * headquartered in Oklahoma today
This page is based on this Wikipedia article Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply. Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.
