A Comprehensive Comparison of Lexemes in the ... - SIL International

12
2.1.2.1 Historical synonyms
At times, lexemes in the Tanna languages appear to be quite different with
no apparent reason for the phonological shift. For instance, as shown in example
(8), N Tanna’s lexeme suwɨt ‘grave’ differs from that of Kwamera, Lenakel, Vaha,
and Whitesands, which is a variant of tək w . 4 One possible explanation is that
Tanna’s lexicon historically contained two nearly synonymous entries for ‘grave.’
Both are still extant in the SW Tanna lexemes təkw and suranə. Kwamera, Lenakel,
Vaha, and Whitesands employ only the former, while N Tanna employs only the
latter.
(8) grave N
Kwamera:
Lenakel:
N Tanna:
SW Tanna:
Vaha:
Whitesands:
tapu
təu
suwɨt
təkw, suranə
təkw
nɨtəu
Another illustration is Tanna’s lexeme for ‘be stupid’ in example (9). The
variations in the modern languages of Tanna are not based on phonological shifts;
rather, the historical lexicon may have contained two entries: armar and ətəwao. N
Tanna retains the former, while Kwamera,Vaha and Whitesands retain the latter.
Again, SW Tanna retains both. (Lenakel’s lexeme for ‘be stupid’ is different
because it is an abstraction of the lexeme eno-eno ‘forget.’)
(9) stupid, be; ignorant, be V/A
Kwamera: ətəwao
Lenakel: eno-eno
N Tanna: alməl
SW Tanna: ətəwao, armar
Vaha: ətəwao
Whitesands: ətəwao
Also, as shown in example (10), the lexemes for ‘show-off’ are dissimilar,
not because of phonological shifts, but because Kwamera, SW Tanna and Vaha use
abstractions of the verb amso ‘show off’ while Lenakel and N Tanna use
abstractions of the verb ausit ‘be proud.’
4 This is probably an abbreviation of the lexeme for ‘mountain’ as graves have a small mount of dirt on them.