Bantu

Modern Grammatical, Phonetical and Lexicographical Studies Since 1860

Clement M. Doke

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2017
• ISBN:
  9781351601559
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Sprachen & Linguistik
• Subtopic: Syntax in der Linguistik

Originally published in 1945, this volume represented the first to classify Bantu languages. This volume does not record all the dialects but makes reference to those in which some grammatical study has been done and classifies them according to mainly geographical zones. Owing to tribal migrations, individual members of a particular zone may be living among members of a different zone (as has been the case with the Ngoni, South-Eastern Zone, who are found among the Eastern Bantu), but the zone label is taken from the habitat of the majority.

BANTU
Modern Grammatical Phonetical and Lexicographical Studies since 1860

FOR the purpose of considering in some order the large amount and diverse nature of the contributions to our knowledge of Bantu languages in modern times, it is necessary to put forward some classification of the Bantu languages themselves. There is such a large number of languages of which some record or other has been made and the designations of the languages and dialects are so diverse and confusing that it is essential to attempt to sort them out and evolve some order out of the chaos. In this present study it is not our purpose to record all the dialects, or even all the languages, but to make reference only to the more important, to those in which some grammatical or other study has been done.

No final classification of Bantu languages has, as yet, been made. All we can advance at this stage is a tentative one, which may act as a basis for future correction and emendation. We divide Bantu languages, first of all into zones, areas characterised by uniform or similar linguistic phenomena. This is mainly a geographical, classification. It must be realized that individual members of a particular zone may today be lining among members of a different zone owing to tribal migrations (as is the case with the Ngoni, South-eastern zone, who are found among the Eastern Bantu), but the zone label is taken from the habitat of the majority. While languages belonging to one zone differ in certain essential phenomena from languages belonging to another zone, yet languages belonging to the same zone need not be mutually understood. Within the zones are groups, aggregations of languages possessing common salient phonetic and grammatical features, and having a high degree of mutual understanding, so that members can, without real difficulty, converse with one another. Naturally individual cases may arise (as with Kalanga or Western Shona, which cannot Join the Shona unification) in which one section of the group has developed historically out of great mutual intelligibility with the other members, and yet must still be considered as belonging to that group. Again, within the groups are clusters, aggregations of dialects which contribute to, or use, a common literary form; and the possibility of the literary unification of the clusters belonging to the same group must not be lost sight of. Dialects are local vernaculars recognised by the Native speakers under special names. It is generally the case that there is a considerable number of dialects contributing to any given literary form in Bantu.¹

Following is a tentative classification of the Bantu zones:

(1) North-western (Duala, Fang, etc.).

(2) Northern (Ganda, Rundi, etc.).

(3) Congo (Kongo, Bangi, etc.).

(4) Central (Luba, Bemba, etc.).

(5) Eastern (Shambala, Chaga, etc.), with which may be associated North-eastern (Swahili), and East-central (Nyanja).

(6) South-eastern (Nguni, Sotho, etc.), with which may be associated South-central (Shona).

(7) Western (Mbundu, Herero, etc.), with which may be associated West-central (Lwena).

It is obvious that the above classification is very general. Division into groups and clusters has only been worked out fully in the South-eastem zone, and at present we must, content ourselves with picking out important members from the other zones. We shall now treat them in the order given.

[1] NORTH-WESTERN ZONE

Position: Languages of this zone abut upon the semi-Bantu and Sudanic languages of West Africa. They are to be found in the North-west corner of Bantu Africa, and are mostly distributed throughout the Cameroons and the Gabun district of French Equatorial Africa.

Characteristics: The main distinguishing features of the zone are:

(i) Monosyllabic prefix forms.

(ii) Moderate inflexion of the verb—inflexion not being so great as elsewhere in Bantu.

(iii) Noun prefix forms rather distinct from anywhere else in Bantu.

(iv) The use of a nasal consonant commonly to end a syllable.

There is distinct evidence that these languages have been influenced by semi—Bantu and Sudanic languages. They cannot be considered typical of Bantu linguistically, even as the people are not typical of Bantu physically.

The most important languages¹ in this zone are:

(a) Bube.

(b) Duala, Isubu, Nkosi, Basa, Lundu.

(c) Benga.

(d) Mpongwe.

(e) Fang, Yaunde and Bulu.

(f) Kele and Duma, with Ndumu.

(a) Bube, the northern dialect of the language of Fernando Pô, referred to by Bleek, Torrend, Johnston and others as ‘Fernandian’ was early analysed by John Clarke.¹ Since 1860 little work of material importance has been done on this or other dialects of the Island. In 1881 was issued from the Primitive Methodist Mission Press Parr’s Bubi na English Dictionary, with notes on grammar.² In 1887–8 Oskar Baumann published in the ‘Z.A.S.’ an article Beiträge zur Kenntniss der Bube—Sprache.³ In 1890, however, appeared a very interesting book, the first and almost the only Bantu grammar written in Spanish; this is Father Joaquin Juanola’s Primer Paso á la Lengua Bubí.⁴ The first part of this book (up to page 88) deals with the northern dialect, the second part comprises mainly appendices dealing with the western dialect at San Carlos and the eastern dialect at Concepcion. Juanola’s effort, though containing a certain amount of detailed information, is a model of what a Bantu grammar should not be. It would weary to give the many instances of this which one might quote. Let two suffice. In the first place he entirely missed the significance of the noun classes, calling the noun prefixes ‘articles’ as the Spanish el, la, lo, los and las. On page 20, for instance, he sets out four ways of forming plurals in Bube: (i) by adding a word of quantity, e.g. chobo > chobo nkenke; (ii) by inflexion, e.g. bompo > bempo; (iii) by inflexion and addition, e.g. eria > biria; and (iv) by change of word (‘por cambio de Palabra’), lottó > mattó. In the second place, his verb classifications are hopelessly mixed; in one of these (page 61) he makes the division into auxiliary, regular, irregular, reflexive, reciprocal and impersonal, shewing no grasp of the principle of verbal derivatives.

As an effective Bantu language Bube, of course, wil...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Half Title
• Title Page
• Copyright Page
• Table of Contents
• FOREWORD
• BANTU: Modern Grammatical, Phonetical, and Lexicographical Studies since 1860
• INDEX