08.07.2014 Views

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

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

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

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

20<br />

means ‘dig’ and kɨt means ‘lead.’ These are two separate entries, confirm<strong>in</strong>g that<br />

<strong>the</strong>re is no semantic connection; <strong>the</strong>y are simply homonyms <strong>in</strong> SW Tanna. 10<br />

(21) dig V/TR lead V/TR<br />

Kwamera: eri Kwamera: iri<br />

Lenakel: ilh Lenakel: ir<br />

N Tanna: el, il N Tanna: it<br />

SW Tanna: kɨr SW Tanna: kɨr<br />

Vaha: kɨl Vaha: kɨt<br />

Whitesands: il Whitesands: it<br />

The SW Tanna name for Aniwa Island, situated <strong>of</strong>f <strong>the</strong> east coast <strong>of</strong> Tanna,<br />

is imɨr, which seems to be derived from i (from ikɨn ‘place’) + mɨrh ‘sun,’ i.e.,<br />

‘place where <strong>the</strong> sun rises.’ However, when <strong>the</strong> lexeme is compared to<br />

Whitesands, it becomes apparent that it is a co<strong>in</strong>cidence that SW Tanna’s name for<br />

Aniwa could mean ‘place <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> sun.’ In Whitesands, <strong>the</strong> name for Aniwa is imɨt,<br />

but <strong>the</strong> word for sun is mɨtɨgar.<br />

As shown <strong>in</strong> example (22), <strong>the</strong> word for ‘festival <strong>of</strong> exchang<strong>in</strong>g food with<br />

cous<strong>in</strong>s’ and ‘casuar<strong>in</strong>a’ (a k<strong>in</strong>d <strong>of</strong> tree) are both nier <strong>in</strong> SW Tanna, while <strong>in</strong><br />

Lenakel, N Tanna, and Vaha <strong>the</strong>y are both niel. Do we have here a case <strong>of</strong> two<br />

homonyms or <strong>of</strong> multiple senses <strong>of</strong> one lexeme? In Whitesands, ‘casuar<strong>in</strong>a’ is niel,<br />

but ’festival <strong>of</strong> exchang<strong>in</strong>g food with cous<strong>in</strong>s’ is nieli, and <strong>in</strong> Kwamera <strong>the</strong> contrast<br />

is between nier and nieri. As shown fur<strong>the</strong>r <strong>in</strong> example (22), <strong>the</strong> word for ‘crosscous<strong>in</strong>’<br />

patterns like ‘festival <strong>of</strong> exchang<strong>in</strong>g food with cous<strong>in</strong>s.’ S<strong>in</strong>ce <strong>the</strong>re is no<br />

obvious semantic correlation between ‘casuar<strong>in</strong>a’ and ‘cross-cous<strong>in</strong>’ or ‘festival <strong>of</strong><br />

exchang<strong>in</strong>g food with cous<strong>in</strong>s,’ and tak<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong>to account <strong>the</strong> phonological<br />

differences between <strong>the</strong> lexemes <strong>in</strong> Whitesands and Kwamera, we may conclude<br />

that <strong>the</strong>y are just homonyms <strong>in</strong> Lenakel, N Tanna, SW Tanna, and Vaha.<br />

(22) festival <strong>of</strong> exchang<strong>in</strong>g<br />

food with cous<strong>in</strong>s N casuar<strong>in</strong>a N cross-cous<strong>in</strong> N<br />

Kwamera: nieri Kwamera: nier Kwamera: *ieri<br />

Lenakel: niel Lenakel: niel Lenakel: ta* iel<br />

N Tanna: niel N Tanna: niel N Tanna: rəh* iel<br />

SW Tanna: nier SW Tanna: nier SW Tanna: kapa* ier<br />

Vaha: niel Vaha: niel Vaha: kapa* iel<br />

Whitesands: nieli Whitesands: niel Whitesands: rəh *ieli<br />

In Kwamera, ‘take feces out <strong>of</strong> <strong>in</strong>test<strong>in</strong>es from an animal’ and ‘dip’ are both<br />

eitesi, as shown <strong>in</strong> example (23). Based just on this data, it seems possible that<br />

<strong>the</strong>re is a semantic connection between <strong>the</strong> two. However, comparison with <strong>the</strong><br />

lexemes <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> o<strong>the</strong>r languages <strong>of</strong> Tanna <strong>in</strong>dicates that <strong>the</strong> two are not<br />

semantically related. They are just homonyms <strong>in</strong> Kwamera.<br />

10 There is <strong>the</strong> possibility that kit and kil were orig<strong>in</strong>ally one lexeme with multiple senses but <strong>the</strong> two senses<br />

<strong>the</strong>n took on idiosyncratic phonological changes to dist<strong>in</strong>guish between <strong>the</strong>m. However, this seems less likely<br />

given <strong>the</strong> fact that <strong>the</strong> senses are quite dist<strong>in</strong>ct to beg<strong>in</strong> with.

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!