Book contents
- The Language of Hunter-Gatherers
- The Language of Hunter-Gatherers
- Copyright page
- Dedication
- Contents
- Figures
- Maps
- Tables
- Contributors
- Preface
- Part I Introduction
- Part II Africa
- 5 Hunters and Gatherers in East Africa and the Case of Ongota (Southwest Ethiopia)
- 6 Changing Profile When Encroaching on Forager Territory
- Part III Tropical Asia
- Part IV New Guinea and Australia
- Part V Northeastern Eurasia
- Part VI North America
- Part VII South America
- Appendix A Preliminary Worldwide Survey of Forager Languages
- Language Index
- Subject Index
- References
6 - Changing Profile When Encroaching on Forager Territory
Toward the History of the Khoe-Kwadi Family in Southern Africa
from Part II - Africa
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 26 February 2020
Book contents
- The Language of Hunter-Gatherers
- The Language of Hunter-Gatherers
- Copyright page
- Dedication
- Contents
- Figures
- Maps
- Tables
- Contributors
- Preface
- Part I Introduction
- Part II Africa
- 5 Hunters and Gatherers in East Africa and the Case of Ongota (Southwest Ethiopia)
- 6 Changing Profile When Encroaching on Forager Territory
- Part III Tropical Asia
- Part IV New Guinea and Australia
- Part V Northeastern Eurasia
- Part VI North America
- Part VII South America
- Appendix A Preliminary Worldwide Survey of Forager Languages
- Language Index
- Subject Index
- References
Summary
The history of southern African languages subsumed under “Khoisan” has been subject to a great deal of speculation, which has stemmed in large part from our ignorance about them. In the last two decades, however, our knowledge has grown considerably and a number of earlier views turned out to be misconceptions or at least weak and premature hypotheses, among them the idea of a Macro-Khoisan family. Nevertheless, some insufficiently substantiated claims are still held as conventional wisdom in and outside the field.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- The Language of Hunter-Gatherers , pp. 114 - 146Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2020
References
Barnard, Alan. (2002). The foraging mode of thought. In Stewart, Henry, Barnard, Alan, and Omura, Keiichi (eds.), Self- and other images of hunter-gatherers. Senri Ethnological Studies 60. Osaka: National Museum of Ethnology, 5–24.Google Scholar
Barnard, Alan (2007). From Mesolithic to Neolithic modes of thought. In Whittle, Alasdair and Cummings, Vicki (eds.), Going over: the mesolithic-neolithic transition in north-west Europe. Proceedings of the British Academy 144. London: The British Academy, 5–19.Google Scholar
Bleek, Dorothea F. (1956). A Bushman dictionary. American Oriental Series 41. New Haven, CT: American Oriental Society.Google Scholar
Budack, Kuno F. R. (1986). Die Klassifikation der Khwe-khwen (Naman) in Südwestafrika. In Voßen, Rainer and Keuthmann, Klaus (eds.), Contemporary studies on Khoisan, Vol. 1: Quellen zur Khoisan-Forschung 5. Hamburg: Helmut Buske, 107–143.Google Scholar
Cashdan, Elizabeth. (1986). Hunter-gatherers of the northern Kalahari. In Voßen, Rainer and Keuthmann, Klaus (eds.), Contemporary studies on Khoisan, Vol. 1: Quellen zur Khoisan-Forschung 5. Hamburg: Helmut Buske, 145–180.Google Scholar
Chen, Yu-Sheng, Olckers, Antonel, Schurr, Theodore G., et al. (2000). mtDNA variation in the South African Kung and Khwe and their genetic relationships to other African populations. American Journal of Human Genetics 66(4): 1362–1383.Google Scholar
Deacon, Hilary J., and Deacon, Janette. (1999). Human beginnings in South Africa: uncovering the secrets of the stone age. Cape Town/ Johannesburg: David Philip.Google Scholar
Denbow, James R. (1986). After the flood: A preliminary account of recent geological, archeological and linguistic investigations in the Okavango region of northern Botswana. In Voßen, Rainer and Keuthmann, Klaus (eds.), Contemporary studies on Khoisan, Vol. 1: Quellen zur Khoisan-Forschung 5. Hamburg: Helmut Buske, 181–214.Google Scholar
Ehret, Christopher. (1982). The first spread of food production to southern Africa. In Ehret, Christopher and Posnansky, Merrick (eds.), The archeological and linguistic reconstruction of African history. Berkeley: University of California Press, 158–181.Google Scholar
Ehret, Christopher (1998). An African classical age: eastern and southern Africa in world history, 1000 B.C. to A.D. 400. Charlottesville: University Press of Virginia.Google Scholar
Elderkin, Edward D. (1986). Diachronic inferences from basic sentence and noun phrase structure in Central Khoisan and Sandawe. In Rottland, Franz and Voßen, Rainer (eds.), Tagungsberichte des Internationalen Symposions “Afrikanische Wildbeuter”, Sankt Augustin, Januar 3–5, 1985, Vol. 2: Sprache und Geschichte in Afrika 7. Hamburg: Helmut Buske, 131–56.Google Scholar
Elderkin, Edward D. (1989). The significance and origin of the use of pitch in Sandawe. PhD thesis, Department of Language and Linguistic Science, University of York.Google Scholar
Elphick, Richard. (1977). Kraal and castle: Khoikhoi and the founding of white South Africa. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Estermann, Carlos. (1959). Os habitantes do Namibe: observação prévia. Portugal em Africa 16: 322–330.Google Scholar
Greenberg, Joseph H. (1963). The languages of Africa. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
Guerreiro, Manuel Viegas (1971). Vida humana no deserto de Namibe: Onguaia. Finisterra 6(11): 84–124.Google Scholar
Güldemann, Tom. (1998). The Kalahari Basin as an object of areal typology: A first approach. In Schladt, Mathias (ed.), Language, identity, and conceptualization among the Khoisan. Quellen zur Khoisan-Forschung 15. Köln: Rüdiger Köppe, 137–169.Google Scholar
Güldemann, Tom (1999). Head-initial meets head-final: Nominal suffixes in eastern and southern Bantu from a historical perspective. Studies in African Linguistics 28(1): 49–91.Google Scholar
Güldemann, Tom (2002). Die Entlehnung pronominaler Elemente des Khoekhoe aus dem !Ui-Taa. In Schumann, Theda, Reh, Mechthild, Kießling, Roland, and Gerhardt, Ludwig (eds.), Aktuelle Forschungen zu afrikanischen Sprachen: Sprachwissenschaftliche Beiträge zum 14. Afrikanistentag, Hamburg, 11–14. Oktober 2000. Köln: Rüdiger Köppe, 43–61.Google Scholar
Güldemann, Tom (2003). Complex pronominals in Tuu and Ju, with special reference to their historical significance. Afrika und Übersee 86: 1–25.Google Scholar
Güldemann, Tom (2004a). Complex pronominals in Tuu and Ju, with special reference to their historical significance. Afrika und Übersee 87: 79–103.Google Scholar
Güldemann, Tom (2004b). Reconstruction through ‘de-construction’: The marking of person, gender, and number in the Khoe family and Kwadi. Diachronica 21(2): 251–306.Google Scholar
Güldemann, Tom (2005). Tuu as a language family. In Tom Güldemann, Studies in Tuu (Southern Khoisan). University of Leipzig Papers on Africa, Languages and Literatures 23. Leipzig: Institut für Afrikanistik, Universität Leipzig, 11–30.Google Scholar
Güldemann, Tom (2006a). Structural isoglosses between Khoekhoe and Tuu: The Cape as a linguistic area. In Yaron, Matras, McMahon, April, and Vincent, Nigel (eds.), Linguistic areas: Convergence in historical and typological perspective. Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan, 99–134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Güldemann, Tom (2006b). The San languages of southern Namibia: Linguistic appraisal with special reference to J. G. Krönlein’s N|uusaa data. Anthropological Linguistics 48(4): 369–395.Google Scholar
Güldemann, Tom (2008a). A linguist’s view: Khoe-Kwadi speakers as the earliest food-producers of southern Africa. In Sadr, Karim and Fauvelle-Aymar, François-Xavier (eds.), Khoekhoe and the earliest herders in southern Africa. Southern African Humanities 20, 93–132.Google Scholar
Güldemann, Tom (2008b). Greenberg’s “case” for Khoisan: The morphological evidence. In Ibriszimow, Dymitr (ed.), Problems of linguistic-historical reconstruction in Africa. Sprache und Geschichte in Afrika 19. Köln: Rüdiger Köppe, 123–153.Google Scholar
Güldemann, Tom (2013a). Phonetics and phonology: Kwadi. In Voßen, Rainer (ed.), The Khoesan Languages. London: Routledge, 87–88.Google Scholar
Güldemann, Tom (2013b). Typology. In Voßen, Rainer (ed.), The Khoesan languages. London: Routledge, 25–37.Google Scholar
Güldemann, Tom (in press). Person-gender-number marking from Proto-Khoe-Kwadi to its descendents: A rejoinder with particular reference to language contact. In Voßen, Rainer and Christa König (eds.), Patterns of linguistic convergence in Africa. Frankfurter Afrikanistische Blätter 27. Köln: Rüdiger Köppe. Retrieved from: www.iaaw.hu-berlin.de/de/region/afrika/afrika/linguistik/mitarbeiter/1683070/dokumente/khoe-kwadi-pronoun-contactGoogle Scholar
Güldemann, Tom, and Elderkin, Edward D.. (2010). On external genealogical relationships of the Khoe family. In Brenzinger, Matthias and König, Christa (eds.), Khoisan languages and linguistics: Proceedings of the 1st International Symposium January 4–8, 2003, Riezlern/Kleinwalsertal. Quellen zur Khoisan-Forschung 24. Köln: Rüdiger Köppe, 15–52.Google Scholar
Güldemann, Tom, and Loughnane, Robyn. (2012). Are there “Khoisan” roots in body-part vocabulary? On linguistic inheritance and contact in the Kalahari Basin. In Güldemann, Tom, Holton, Gary, Loughnane, Robyn, and Robinson, Laura(eds.), Methodology in linguistic prehistory. Language Dynamics and Change 2, 2, 215–258.Google Scholar
Haacke, Wilfrid H. G. (2002). Linguistic evidence in the study of origins: The case of the Namibian Khoekhoe-speakers (inaugural lecture). Windhoek: University of Namibia.Google Scholar
Hastings, Rachel. (2001). Evidence for the genetic unity of Southern Khoisan. In Bell, Arthur and Washburn, Paul (eds.), Khoisan: Syntax, phonetics, phonology, and contact. Cornell Working Papers in Linguistics 18. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University, 225–246.Google Scholar
Heine, Bernd, and Honken, Henry. (2010). The Kx’a family: A new Khoisan genealogy. Journal of Asian and African Studies 79: 5–36.Google Scholar
Heine, Bernd, and Voßen., Rainer (1981). Sprachtypologie. In Heine, Bernd, Schadeberg, Thilo C., and Wolff, Ekkehard (eds.), Die Sprachen Afrikas. Hamburg. Buske, 407–444.Google Scholar
Jenkins, Trefor. (1988). The peoples of southern Africa: Studies in diversity and disease. Raymond Dart Lectures 24. Johannesburg: Witwatersrand University Press.Google Scholar
Köhler, Oswin. (1960). Sprachkritische Aspekte zur Hamitentheorie über die Herkunft der Hottentotten. Sociologus 10(1): 69–77.Google Scholar
Jenkins, Trefor (1981). Les langues khoisan, Section 1: présentation d’ensemble. In Perrot, Jean(ed.), Les langues dans le monde ancien et moderne, prèmiere partie: Les langues de l’afrique subsaharienne. Paris: CNRS, 455–482.Google Scholar
Jenkins, Trefor (1986). Allgemeine und sprachliche Bemerkungen zum Feldbau nach Oraltexten der Kxoe-Buschleute. In Rottland, Franz and Voßen, Rainer (eds.), Tagungsberichte des Internationalen Symposions “Afrikanische Wildbeuter,” Sankt Augustin, Januar 3–5, 1985, Vol. 2: Sprache und Geschichte in Afrika 7. Hamburg: Helmut Buske, 205–272.Google Scholar
Livingstone, David. (1851). Second visit to the South African Lake Ngami. Extract of letter from Rev. Dr. Livingston, under Date Kolobeng, 24th August, 1850. Journal of the Royal Geographical Society of London 21: 18–24.Google Scholar
Livingstone, David (1858). Missionary travels and researches in South Africa. New York: Harper and Brothers.Google Scholar
Mitchell, Peter. (2002). The archaeology of Southern Africa. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Nurse, George T., and Jenkins, Trefor. (1977). Serogenetic studies on the Kavango peoples of south west Africa. Annals of Human Biology 4(5): 465–78.Google Scholar
Oliver, Roland, and Fagan, Brian M.. (1978). The emergence of Bantu Africa. In Fage, J. D. (ed.), The Cambridge history of Africa, Vol. 2: From c. 500 BC to AD 1050. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 342–409.Google Scholar
Pickrell, Joseph K., Patterson, Nick and Barbieri, Chiara (2012). The genetic prehistory of southern Africa. Nature Communications 3, Article 1143. Retrieved from: www.nature.com/ncomms/journal/v3/n10/full/ncomms2140.htmlGoogle Scholar
Rottland, Franz, and Voßen, Rainer (eds.). (1986). Tagungsberichte des Internationalen Symposions “Afrikanische Wildbeuter”, Sankt Augustin, Januar 3–5, 1985, 2 vols. Sprache und Geschichte in Afrika 7. Hamburg: Helmut Buske.Google Scholar
Sands, Bonny E. (1998). Eastern and southern African Khoisan: Evaluating claims of distant linguistic relationships. Quellen zur Khoisan-Forschung 14. Köln: Rüdiger Köppe.Google Scholar
Sands, Bonny E. (2010). Juu subgroups based on phonological patterns. In Brenzinger, Matthias and König, Christa (eds.), Khoisan languages and linguistics: Proceedings of the 1st International Symposium January 4–8, 2003, Riezlern/Kleinwalsertal. Quellen zur Khoisan-Forschung 24. Köln: Rüdiger Köppe, 85–114.Google Scholar
Schultze, Leonhard. (1928). Zur Kenntnis des Körpers der Hottentotten und Buschmänner. Jena: G. Fischer.Google Scholar
Smith, Andrew B. (1990). On becoming herders: Khoikhoi and San ethnicity in southern Africa. African Studies 49: 50–73.Google Scholar
Smith, Andrew B. (1996). Khoi/San relationships: Marginal differences or ethnicity. In Skotnes, Pippa (ed.), Miscast: negotiating the presence of the Bushmen. Cape Town: University of Cape Town Press, 249–251.Google Scholar
Smith, Andrew B. (2005a). Origins and spread of African pastoralism. History Compass 3, AF 187: 1–7.Google Scholar
Smith, Andrew B. (2005b). The concepts of ‘Neolithic’ and ‘Neolithisation’ for Africa? Before Farming 1, article 2: 1–6. Retrieved from: https://online.liverpooluniversitypress.co.uk/loi/bfarmGoogle Scholar
Snyman, Jan W. (1997). A preliminary classification of the !Xũũ and Žu|’hõasi dialects. In Haacke, Wilfrid H. G. and Elderkin, Edward D. (eds.), Namibian Languages: Reports and Papers. Namibian African Studies 4. Köln: Rüdiger Köppe, 21–106.Google Scholar
Soodyall, Himla, and Jenkins, Trefor. (1992). Mitochondrial DNA polymorphisms in Khoisan populations from Southern Africa. Annals of Human Genetics 56: 315–324.Google Scholar
Soodyall, Himla, and Jenkins, Trefor (1998). Khoisan prehistory: The evidence of genes. In Bank, Andrew (ed.), The Proceedings of “The Khoisan Identities and Cultural Heritage Conference,” organized by the Institute for Historical Research, University of the Western Cape, held at the South African Museum, Cape Town, July 12–16, 1997. Cape Town: Infosource, 374–382.Google Scholar
Traill, Anthony. (1986). Do the Khoi have a place in the San? New data on Khoisan linguistic relationships. In Rottland, Franz and Voßen, Rainer (eds.), Tagungsberichte des Internationalen Symposions “Afrikanische Wildbeuter”, Sankt Augustin, Januar 3-5, 1985, vol. 1. Sprache und Geschichte in Afrika 7(1): 407–430.Google Scholar
Vedder, Heinrich. (1997 [1934]). Das alte Südwestafrika: Südwestafrikas Geschichte bis zum Tode Mahareros 1890. Windhoek: Namibia Wissenschaftliche Gesellschaft.Google Scholar
Voßen, Rainer. (1984). Studying the linguistic and ethno-history of the Khoe-speaking (central Khoisan) peoples of Botswana, research in progress. Botswana Notes and Records 16: 19–35.Google Scholar
Voßen, Rainer (1997). Die Khoe-Sprachen: Ein Beitrag zur Erforschung der Sprachgeschichte Afrikas. Quellen zur Khoisan-Forschung 12. Köln: Rüdiger Köppe.Google Scholar
Voßen, Rainer (2007). Languages of the desert … and what they can tell us about the economic history of southern Africa. In Möhlig, Wilhelm J. G., (ed.), Cultural change in the prehistory of arid Africa. Sprache und Geschichte in Afrika 18. Köln: Rüdiger Köppe, 175–185.Google Scholar
Voßen, Rainer, and Keuthmann, Klaus (eds.). (1986). Contemporary Studies on Khoisan, 2 vols. Quellen zur Khoisan-Forschung 5. Hamburg: Helmut Buske.Google Scholar
Werner, H. (1906). Anthropologische, ethnologische und ethnographische Beobachtungen über die Heikum- und Kungbuschleute, nebst einem Anhang über die Sprachen dieser Buschmannstämme. Zeitschrift für Ethnologie 38(3): 241–68.Google Scholar
Westphal, Ernst O. J. (1963). The linguistic prehistory of Southern Africa: Bush, Kwadi, Hottentot, and Bantu linguistic relationships. Africa 33: 237–265.Google Scholar
Westphal, Ernst O. J. (1971). The click languages of southern and eastern Africa. In Sebeok, Thomas A. (ed.), Linguistics in Sub-Saharan Africa. Current Trends in Linguistics 7. The Hague/ Paris: Mouton, 367–420.Google Scholar
Westphal, Ernst O. J. (1980). The age of “Bushman” languages in southern African pre-history. In Snyman, Jan W. (ed.), Bushman and Hottentot Linguistic Studies (papers of seminar held on July 27, 1979). Miscellanea Congregalia 16. Pretoria: University of South Africa, 59–79.Google Scholar
- 1
- Cited by