Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-dh8gc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-09T07:40:39.787Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Concerning a vocalic alternation in North Omotic verb paradigms

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 February 2009

R. J Hayward
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Examination of the verb paradigms of Omotic can easily engender a sense of bewilderment; there is such a variation from language to language, even when, in other respects, the languages concerned appear to be quite closely related. Coming to Omotic from a language group such as Eaśt Cushitic, the contrast is especially striking. For example, when investigating any little known East Cushitic language (and there are a few left!), one starts out with a strong expectation of finding in the verbal system certain morphological elements and patterns (e.g., t ‘2nd person, 3rd feminine singular’; n ‘1st person plural’ a palatal vowel signalling ‘perfect’; a guttural verb signalling ‘imperfect’; a rounded vowel signalling a ‘subordinate function’ or ‘non-indicative mood’; etc.), and one is never entirely disappointed; the well known formatives, along with the anticipated patterns of distribution, crop up with an almost monotonous regularity. Similar predictabilities are not obviously the case when we look at Omotic. With virtually every new language investigated, new and unfamiliar features emerge. I have remarked on this before (Hayward, 1984: 324), but I am not alone in having done so; Andrzej Zaborski has also emphasized the high degree of innovation seen in the Omotic verb (Zaborski, 1986: 528). But I think the essence of the problem is not that there are no identifiable cognate formatives so much as that we have been unable to understand their historical significance, andso supply them with meaningful labels.

Type
Articles
Information
Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies , Volume 54 , Issue 3 , October 1991 , pp. 535 - 553
Copyright
Copyright © School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London 1991

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Adams, B. A. 1983. ‘A tagmemic analysis of the Wolaitta language.’ Unpublished Ph.D. thesis, University of London.Google Scholar
Allan, E. J. 1976. Kullo. In Bender, M. L (ed.), 1976, 324–50.Google Scholar
Bechhaus-Gerst, M. and Serzisko, F. (ed.) 1988. Cushitic–Omotic. Papers from the international symposium on Cushitic and Omotic languages, Cologne, January 6–9, 1986. Hamburg: Helmut Buske Verlag.Google Scholar
Bender, M. L. 1971. ‘The languages of Ethiopia: A new lexicostatistic classification and some problems of diffusion’, Anthropological Linguistics, 13, 5: 165–288.Google Scholar
Bender, M. L. (ed.) 1976. The non-Semitic languages of Ethiopia. East Lansing: African Studies Center, Michigan State University.Google Scholar
Bender, M. L. 1988. ‘Proto-Omotic phonology and lexicon’, in Bechhaus-Gerst, M.and Serzisko, F. (ed.), 1988, 121–59.Google Scholar
Böhm, G. 1987. ‘Präfixkonjugation und Suffixkonjugation in den oraotischen Sprachen’, in Jungraithmayr, H. and Müller, W. W. (ed.), 1987, 169–93.Google Scholar
Breeze, M. 1990. ‘A sketch of the phonology and grammar of Gimira (Benchnon)’, in Hayward, R. J. (ed.), 1990, 1–67.Google Scholar
Cerulli, E. 1929. ‘Note su alcune popolazioni Sidama dell’Abissinia meridionale’, Rivista degli Studi Orientali, 12: 1–69.Google Scholar
Cerulli, E. 1938. Il linguaggio dei Giangerò ed alcune lingue Sidama deli’Onto (Basketo, Ciara, Zaissè) (Studi Etiopici III). Roma: Istituto per l’Oriente.Google Scholar
Cerulli, E. 1951. La lingua caffina. (Studi Etiopici IV.) Roma: Istituto per l’Oriente.Google Scholar
Conti Rossini, C. 1936. ‘Contributi per la conoscenza della lingua haruro’, Rendiconli della Reale Academia dei Lincei, 6.12: 621–679.Google Scholar
Fleming, H. C. 1976(a). ‘Omotic overview’, in Bender, M. L. (ed.), 1976, 299–323.Google Scholar
C., Fleming H 1976(b) ‘Kefa (Gonga) languages’, in Bender, M. L. (ed.), 1976, 351–76.Google Scholar
Hetzron, R. 1972. Ethiopian Semitic: studies in classification. (Journal of Semitic Studies, Monograph No. 2). Manchester: Manchester University Press.Google Scholar
Hetzron, R. 1980. ‘The limits of Cushitic’, Sprache und Geschichte in Afrika, 2: 7–126.Google Scholar
Hayward, R. J. 1982 ‘Notes on the Koyra language’, Afrika und Übersee, 65.2: 211–68.Google Scholar
Hayward, R. J. 1984. ‘The Proto-Omotic verb formative *d-’, BSOAS, XLVII, 2: 324–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hayward, R. J. 1987. ‘Terminal vowels in Ometo nominals’, in Jungraithmayr, H. and Müller, W. W. (ed.). 1987, 215–31.Google Scholar
Hayward, R. J. 1988. ‘Remarks on the Omotic sibilants’, in Bechhaus-Gerst, M.and Serzisko, F. (ed.), 1988.Google Scholar
Hayward, R. J. 1989. ‘The notion of “default gender”; a key to interpreting the evolution of certain verb paradigms in East Ometo, and its implications for Omotic’, Afrika und Übersee, 72: 17–32.Google Scholar
Hayward, R. J. 1990. ‘Notes on the Zayse language’, in Haywards, R. J. (ed.), 1990, 210–355.Google Scholar
Haywards, R. J. (ed.) 1990. Omotic language studies. London: School of Oriental and African Studies (University of London).Google Scholar
Haywards, R. J. (forthcoming (a)) ‘The position of Omotic within Afroasiatic: a survey of the evidence’. To appear in Transactions of the Philological Society.Google Scholar
Haywards, R. J. (forthcoming (b)) ‘The new inflectional paradigms of Eastern Omotic.’ To appear in the Proceedings of the second International Symposium on Cushitic and Omolic Languages, Turin, November 24–26, 1989.Google Scholar
Haywards, R. J. (in preparation.) ‘A velar element in Omotic verb forms: the statement of a problem‘.Google Scholar
Hompó, E. 1990. ‘Grammatical relations in Gamo: A pilot sketch’, in Haywards, R. J. (ed.) 1990, 356–405.Google Scholar
Jungraithmayr, H. and Müller, W. W. (ed.). 1987. Proceedings of the fourth International HamitoSemitic Congress, Hamburg, September 20–22, 1983. (Published as Current issues in linguistic theory, Vol. 44.) Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Moreno, M. M. 1938. Introduzione alia lingua Ometo. Milano: Mondadori.Google Scholar
Owens, J. 1985. A grammar of Harar Oromo (Northeastern Ethiopia). (Kuschitische Sprachstudien, Bd. 4, hrsg. von Hans-Jürgen Sasse). Hamburg: Helmut Buske Verlag.Google Scholar
Parker, E. M. and Haywards, R. J. 1985. An Afar-English-French dictionary (with grammatical notes in English). London: School of Oriental and African Studies (University of London).Google Scholar
Plazikowsky-Brauner, H. 1950. ‘Schizzo morfologico dello Šinaša’, Rassegna di Studi Etiopici, 9: 65–83.Google Scholar
Polotsky, J. H. 1951. Notes on Gurage grammar. Jerusalem.Google Scholar
Reinisch, L. 1988. ‘Die Kafa-Sprache in Nordost-Afrika’, Sitzungsberichte derphil.-hist. Klasse der Kaiserlichen Akademie der Wissenschaften, Bd. 116: 53–143 and 251–386.Google Scholar
Rottland, F. 1990. ‘A sketch of Shinasha morphology’; in Haywards, R. J. (ed.), 1990, 185–209.Google Scholar
Sim, R. J. 1989. ‘Predicate conjoining in Haddiya: A head-driven PS grammar’. Unpublished Ph.D. thesis. University of Edinburgh.Google Scholar
Tucker, A. N. 1967. ‘Fringe Cushitic: an experiment in typological comparison’, BSOAS, xxx. 3: 655–80.Google Scholar
Wedekind, K. 1985.‘Why Bench’ (Ethiopia) has five level tones today’, in Pieper, and Stickel, (ed.), 1985. (Studia linguistica diachronica et synchronica.) Berlin/New York/Amsterdam: Mouton de Gruyter. 881–901.Google Scholar
Zaborski, A. 1986. ‘Can Omotic be reclassified as West Cushitic?’, in Goldenberg, G. (ed.), Proceedings of the sixth International Conference of Ethiopian Studies, Tel-Aviv, April 14–17, 1980. Rotterdam/Boston: A. A. Balkema 525–30.Google Scholar