لغات الأومو

(تم التحويل من اللغات الأوموتية)
يجب ألا يـُخلـَط بينها وبين Omotik language.
لغات الأومو Omotic
Geographic
distribution		إثيوپيا، السودان
Native speakers
7٫9 مليون
Linguistic classificationالأفرو-آسيوية
  • لغات الأومو Omotic
Subdivisions
ISO 639-5omv
GlottologNone
Omotic languages german.svg
The Omotic languages
Neighboring languages

لغات الأومو Omotic languages تعتبر فرع من فروع اللغات الأفروآسيوية، وهي مجموعة من لغات إثيوبيا الجنوبية الغربية، وبعضها يقع في ولاية النيل الأزرق بالسودان. Geʽez script is used to write some of the Omotic languages, the Latin script for some others. They are fairly agglutinative and have complex tonal systems (for example, the Bench language). The languages have around 7.9 million speakers.[1] The group is generally classified as belonging to the Afroasiatic language family, but this is disputed by some.

Four separate "Omotic" groups are accepted by Glottolog 4.0 and Güldemann (2018): North Omotic, Dizoid (Maji), Mao, and Aroid ("South Omotic").[2]

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

اللغات

The North and South Omotic branches ("Nomotic" and "Somotic") are universally recognized, with some dispute as to the composition of North Omotic. The primary debate is over the placement of the Mao languages. Bender (2000) classifies Omotic languages as follows:

Apart from terminology, this differs from Fleming (1976) in including the Mao languages, whose affiliation had originally been controversial, and in abolishing the "Gimojan" group.[مطلوب توضيح] There are also differences in the subclassification of Ometo, which is not covered here.


Hayward (2003)

Hayward (2003) separates out the Mao languages as a third branch of Omotic and breaks up Ometo–Gimira:

Blench (2006)

Blench (2006) gives a more agnostic classification:[3]

Bosha† is unclassified; Ethnologue lists it as a dialect of Kafa but notes it may be a distinct language.


وأهمها تلك اللغات:

ويبدو أنها أول فرع انفصل عن الأفروآسيوية، ولهذا فهذه اللغات أقل اللغات الأفروآسيوية شبها للغات الأخرى. وكانت تعتبر جزءا من اللغات الكوشية.

في معظمهم، تقول "تا" في معنى "أنا"، و"نَي" في معنى "أنت"، وهذا فرق كبير من اللغات الأفروآسيوية الأخرى.

التبويب

Omotic is generally considered the most divergent branch of the Afroasiatic languages. In early work up to Greenberg (1963), the languages had been classified in a subgroup of Cushitic, called most often "West Cushitic". Fleming (1969) argued that it should instead be classified as an independent branch of Afroasiatic, a view which Bender (1971) established to most linguists' satisfaction,[4] though a few linguists maintain the West Cushitic position[5] or that only South Omotic forms a separate branch, with North Omotic remaining part of Cushitic.[بحاجة لمصدر] Blench notes that Omotic shares honey-related vocabulary with Cushitic but not cattle-related vocabulary, suggesting that the split occurred before the advent of pastoralism.[6] A few scholars have raised doubts that the Omotic languages are part of the Afroasiatic language family at all,[7][8] and Theil (2006) proposes that Omotic be treated as an independent family.[9] However, the general consensus, based primarily on morphological evidence, such as pronominal prefixes, Grammatical number and plural form, prefix conjugation and Vowel Harmony is that membership in Afroasiatic is well established.[10][11][12]

The Aroid (South Omotic) languages were first included in "West Cushitic" by Greenberg; they were excluded from earlier classifications by Italian Cushiticists such as Enrico Cerulli and Mario Martino Moreno,[13] and their inclusion in Omotic remains contested.

Glottolog

Hammarström, et al. in Glottolog does not consider Omotic to be a unified group, and also does not consider any of the "Omotic" groups to be part of the Afroasiatic phylum. Glottolog accepts the following as independent language families.

These four families are also accepted by Güldemann (2018), who similarly doubts the validity of Omotic as a unified group.[2]

السمات

العامة

The Omotic languages have a morphology that is partly agglutinative and partly fusional:

  • Agglutinating: Yem am-se-f-∅-à go+plural+present+3. Person+Femininum “they go”[14]
  • Fusional: Aari ʔíts-eka eat+3. Person Pl. Converb “by eating”[15]

Inflection through suprasegmental morphemes is found in individual languages such as Dizi and Bench; Historically, these are partly reflexes of affixes:

  • Bench sum˩ "name", sum-s˦ "to name"

The nominal morphology is based on a nominative-accusative-absolutive system; For verbal morphology, a complex inflection according to categories such as tense/aspect, interrogative - declarative and affirmative - negative as well as agreement is more predicative characterizing forms with the subject. In syntax, the word order subject-object-verb (SOV) is generally valid; Postpositions are used, which can be considered typical for both SOV languages in general and for the Ethiopian region.

الصواتة

The Omotic languages have on average slightly less than thirty consonant phonemes, which is a comparatively high number, but is also found in other primary branches of Afro-Asian. Commonly used are bilabial, alveolar, velar and glottal plosive, various fricative, alveolar affricates and /w/, /y/, /l/, /r/, /m/, /n/. What is typical for the non-glottal plosives is that they are each represented by a voiced, a voiceless, and an ejective phoneme; All three types can also be found in fricatives and affricates. Most Omotic languages have additional consonants. Examples of this are the Implosive in South Omotic (/ɓ/, /ɗ/, /ɠ/) and the Retroflex of the Bench. In some cases, consonants can also occur geminated. Representatives of the Nordomotic and Mao have five to six vowel phonemes, the quantity is partly a difference in meaning; In contrast, much more extensive vowel systems are typical for South Omotic.

All Omotic languages for which sufficient data is available are tonal languages, which usually only distinguish two tones (high and low), some languages have more tones: Dizi distinguishes three, Bench six. Certain Omotic languages such as Aari and Ganza (Mao) have tonal accent systems in which each independent word has exactly one high tone, whereas in most languages the tones are freely distributed.

الشكلية

الأسماء

The Omotic languages distinguish between the nominal categories number, case,[16] and definiteness. These categories are marked by different suffixes, which can be fusional or analytic depending on the language. The two genders in all omotic languages for which sufficient data are available are masculine and feminine; they essentially correspond to natural gender. The case system distinguishes the omotic languages as accusative languages; other cases form various adverbial determinations. A number of omotic languages have an absolutive case, which marks the citation form and the direct object (examples from Wolaita):[17]

  • Absolute keett-a "the house"
  • Nominative keett-i "the house"

Some common case suffixes are:

  • Nominative *-i (Gonga-Gimojan, Dizi-Sheko)
  • Accusative *-m (South Domotic)
  • Genitive *-kV (Gonga-Gimojan, Dizi-Sheko, Mao, Dime)
  • Dative *-s (Gonga-Gimojan, Dizi-Sheko, Mao?[18])

A typological peculiarity, which is also isolated within Omotic, is the person and gender dependency of the nominative in Bench (either -i˧ or -a˧, depending on the person):

  • a˦tsin˦-a˧ “a woman” (3rd person sg. femininum)[19]
  • nun˧-a˧ "we" (1st person plural exclusive)[20]
  • nas˦i˧ “a man” (3rd person sg. masculine)[20]

In most languages, the singular is unmarked, while the plural has its own suffix. It is possible that plural suffixes in some languages arose from a partitive construction. This is supported by the length of certain plural suffixes, formal relationships to the genitive singular and the fact that the determining suffix sometimes comes before the plural suffix, which is typologically unusual:[21]

  • Dizi kìan-à-kʾankàs dog+det.+plural “the dogs”[22]
  • Yem ʔasú-nì-kitó human+gene+plural “people”[23]

الضمائر

The personal pronouns distinguish similar categories to the nouns in most omotic languages; However, the genera are usually only marked in the 3rd person singular. The personal pronouns usually have their own stem for each number-person-gender combination, to which case suffixes are then added, which are the same for all persons. Some of the pronouns show similarities with other Afro-Asian language families and can therefore be traced back to Proto-Afro-Asiatic; Certain South Omotic personal pronouns can be explained as borrowings from the neighboring Nilo-Saharan:[24]

  Singular Plural
1. 2. 3. m. 3. f. 1. 2. 3.
Omotic Nordomotic
 Proto-Gonga-Gimojan *ta *no *isi ? *nu~*no *int- *is-
 Proto-Dizi-Sheko *ǹ *yeta *iz- *iži *ń *iti *iš-
Proto-Mao *ti- *hiya ? ? ? *nam ?
Proto-Southomotic *inta *yaa/*in *nuo *naaa *wo-ta *ye-ta *ke-ta
Other Afroasiatic: Akkadian ī k-a/k-ī š-u š-a nī k-unu/k-ina š-unu/š-ina
Nilotic: Teso[25] ɛɔŋɔ ɪjɔ ŋɛsɪ ɔnɪ/ɪs(y)ɔ yɛsɪ kɛsɪ

The case endings of the personal pronouns and the nouns are usually identical:

  • Aari: Accusative -m: yé-m "you", fatir-in-ám "the corn"

Possessive pronouns in particular have their own forms:

  • Aari: yé "yours," ʔéed-te "a man's"


. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

إعادة البناء

Bender (1987: 33–35)[26] reconstructs the following proto-forms for Proto-Omotic and Proto-North Omotic, the latter which is considered to have descended from Proto-Omotic.

English gloss Proto-
Omotic		 Proto-North
Omotic
ashes *bend
bird *kaf
bite *sats’
breast *t’iam
claw *ts’ugum
die *hayk’
dog *kan
egg *ɓul
fire *tam
grass *maata
hand *kuc
head *to-
hear *si-
mouth *non-
nose *si(n)t’
root *ts’ab-
snake *šooš
stand (vb.) *yek’
this *kʰan-
thou (2.SG) *ne(n)
water *haats’
we (1.PL) *nu(n)
ye (2.PL) *int-
green *c’il-
house *kyet
left *hadr-
elephant *daŋgVr
sister, mother *ind
armpit *šoɓ-
boat *gong-
grave *duuk
vomit *c’oš-

انظر أيضاً

الهامش

  1. ^ "Omotic languages". Ethnologue. Retrieved 6 March 2024.
  2. ^ أ ب Güldemann, Tom (2018). "Historical linguistics and genealogical language classification in Africa". In Güldemann, Tom (ed.). The Languages and Linguistics of Africa. The World of Linguistics series. Vol. 11. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. pp. 58–444. doi:10.1515/9783110421668-002. ISBN 978-3-11-042606-9. S2CID 133888593.
  3. ^ Blench, 2006. The Afro-Asiatic Languages: Classification and Reference List
  4. ^ Hayward (2000:85)
  5. ^ Lamberti (1991), Zaborksi (1986)
  6. ^ Blench, Roger (2006). Archaeology, Language, and the African Past. Oxford: AltaMira Press. pp. 150–152. ISBN 9780759104662.
  7. ^ I. M. Diakonoff (1998) Journal of Semitic Studies 43:209: "It is quite evident that cultural ties between Proto-Semitic and the African branches of the Afrasian macrofamily must have been severed at a very early date indeed. However, the grammatical structure of [Common Semitic] (especially in the verb) is obviously close to that of Common Berbero-Libyan (CBL), as well as to Bedauye. (Bedauye might, quite possibly, be classified as a family distinct from the rest of Kushitic.) The same grammatical isoglosses are somewhat more feebly felt between Semitic and (the other?) Kushitic languages. They practically disappear between the Semitic and the Omotic languages, which were formerly termed Western Kushitic, but which actually may not be Afrasian at all, like their neighbours the Nubian languages and Meroitic."
  8. ^ Newman (1980)
  9. ^ Rolf Theil (2006) Is Omotic Afro-Asiatic? pp 1–2: "I claim to show that no convincing arguments have been presented [for the inclusion of Omotic (OM) in Afro-Asiatic (AA)], and that OM should be regarded as an independent language family. No closer genetic relations have been demonstrated between OM and AA than between OM and any other language family."
  10. ^ Gerrit Dimmendaal (2008) "Language Ecology and Linguistic Diversity on the African Continent", in Language and Linguistics Compass 2/5:841: "Although its Afroasiatic affiliation has been disputed, the allocation of Omotic within this family is now well-established, based on the attestation of morphological properties that this family shares with other Afroasiatic branches."
  11. ^ Ehret, Christopher (2010-12-17). History and the Testimony of Language (in الإنجليزية). University of California Press. ISBN 978-0-520-94759-7.
  12. ^ Lecarme, Jacqueline (2003-01-01). Research in Afroasiatic Grammar Two (in الإنجليزية). John Benjamins Publishing. ISBN 978-90-272-4753-7.
  13. ^ Lamberti, Marcello (1991). "Cushitic and its Classifications". Anthropos: 552–561.
  14. ^ Mammo Girma: Yemsa Verb Morphology. Some Inflections and Derivations. 1986, quoted from Bender 2000, 120; Clay marking according to the different forms in Lamberti 1993, 190
  15. ^ Hayward 1990, quoted in Bender 2000, 171
  16. ^ See: R. Hayward, Y. Tsuge: Concerning case in Omotic. In: Africa and Overseas. Volume 81, pp. 21-38. 1998.
  17. ^ Bender 2000, 21
  18. ^ So Bender 2000, 212
  19. ^ Bender 2000, 127
  20. ^ أ ب Mary J. Breeze: Personal Pronouns in Gimira (Benchnon). In: Ursula Wiesemann (Ed.): Pronominal Systems. Narr, Tübingen 1986, ISBN 3-87808-335-1, pp. 47–70, p. 53.
  21. ^ Hayward 2003, 246; Lamberti 1993, 70 f.
  22. ^ Bender 2000.
  23. ^ Lamberti 1993, 71
  24. ^ Reconstructions according to Bender 2000, 196
  25. ^ Bender 2000, 163
  26. ^ Bender, Lionel M. 1987. "First Steps Toward proto-Omotic." Current Approaches to African Linguistics 3 (1987): 21–36.

المصادر

  • Bender, M. Lionel. 2000. Comparative Morphology of the Omotic Languages. Munich: LINCOM.
  • Fleming, Harold. 1976. Omotic overview. In The Non-Semitic Languages of Ethiopia, ed. by M. Lionel Bender, pp. 299–323. East Lansing, MI: Michigan State University.
  • Newman, Paul. 1980. The classification of Chadic within Afroasiatic. Universitaire Pers Leiden.

ببليوجرافيا الأومو العامة

  • Bender, M. L. 1975. Omotic: a new Afroasiatic language family. (University Museum Series, 3.) Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University.
  • Blench, Roger. 2006. Archaeology, Language, and the African Past. AltaMira Press
  • Hayward, Richard J., ed. 1990. Omotic Language Studies. London: School of Oriental and African Studies.
  • Hayward, Richard J. 2003. Omotic: the "empty quarter" of Afroasiatic linguistics. In Research in Afroasiatic Grammar II: selected papers from the fifth conference on Afroasiatic languages, Paris 2000, ed. by Jacqueline Lecarme, pp. 241–261. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
  • Lamberti, Marcello. 1991. Cushitic and its classification. Anthropos 86(4/6):552-561.
  • Zaborski, Andrzej. 1986. Can Omotic be reclassified as West Cushitic? In Gideon Goldenberg, ed., Ethiopian Studies: Proceedings of the 6th International Conference, pp. 525–530. Rotterdam: Balkema.

وصلات خارجية

الكلمات الدالة:
تمّ الاسترجاع من "https://www.marefa.org/w/index.php?title=لغات_الأومو&oldid=3984201"