In this paper I will consider linguistic e v i d -
ence from phonology and morphology for internal
classification of Tupi-Guarani. Lexical coherence
has been shown by various authors, including L e m -
le ( 1 9 7 1 ) , although her first aim was a phonological
classification. Leite (1982) studied the place of
Tapirapé within the Tupi-Guarani family on the
basis of vowel changes. It is evident that the
grouping of languages depends on the criteria a p -
plied. Rodrigues, for instance, showed that the
traditional division of the family into Tupi and
Guarani languages, which was founded on the c o n -
servation of - s - in Tupi and its change to - h - in
Guarani, is not sufficient for a genetic c l a s s i f i c a -
tion and that lexical comparison leads to quite
different results (Rodrigues 1964:103). Rodrigues'
recently published paper on the "Internal r e l a t i o n -
ship within the Tupi-Guarani language family" ( R o -
drigues 1 9 8 4 / 8 5 ) is based on evidence from h i s t o r i -
cal phonology.
1.2.2. Ultimately, the purpose of the present study
will be a genetic grouping, too, because the c r i t e -
ria for the comparison of phonetic, phonological,
and morphological properties were mostly chosen
according to the principle of conservation or loss
of a feature of one of the "classical" languages of
the family, that is, of Tupinambá (Old Tupi) and
Avañe'é (Modern Paraguayan Guarani). Questions of
genetic relationship are also involved when we consider innovations unknown in one of the " c l a s -
sical" languages
Author(s): Wolf Dietrich
Series: Indiana ; 12 ; Beiträge zur Volker und Altertumskunde, Spachen- Sozial- und Geschichtsforschung des Indianischen Lateinamerika
Publisher: Ibero-Amerikanisches Institut – Preußischer Kulturbesitz; Gebr. Mann Verlag
Year: 1990
Language: English
Pages: 144
City: Berlin
Tags: Linguistics; Lingüística; Historical Linguistics; Lingüística Histórica; Dialectología; Dialectology; Tupi; Tupi languages; Guarani; Guarani languages; Amazonian languages; Familia Tupí-Guaraní; Tupi-Guarani Language Family; Lenguas peruanas; Peruvian Languages; Brasil; Languages from Brazil; Paraguay; Tupinamba; Lingua Geral; Amazonian Linguistics; Lingüística amazónica
Contents 5
1. Objectives of the study 7
2. Data basis and methods 9
3. Phonological criteria 13
3.1. Technique of comparison 13
3.2. First set of phonological criteria 13
3.2.1. Treatment of final consonants 13
3 . 2 . 2 . Word stress 16
3.2.3. Syncope 18
3 . 2 . 4 . Nasality 18
3.2.5. Prenasal stops 19
3.2.6. Distinction between [j) and (ñ] 20
3.2.7. Distinction between (w) and [gwj 2 0
3.2.8. Treatment of ' / j / 20
3.2.9. Glottal stop 22
3 . 2 . 1 0 . Treatment of V p / 22
3.3. Matrix of comparison 23
3.4. Second set of phonological criteria 25
3.4.1. Treatment of ' I I I and ' / c / 25
3.4.2. Treatment of / i / + ' I I I , HI + ' / c / 36
3 . 4 . 3 . Existence of / h / 36
3.5. Matrix of comparison 37
3.6. Third set of phonological criteria 39
3.6.1. Treatment of ' / p w / 39
3.6.2. Treatment of III + / i / 39
3.6.3. Vowel shift 41
3.6.4. Treatment of * / k / 43
3.7. Matrix of comparison 43
4. Results of phonological comparison 455. First set of grammatical and morphological criteria 60
5.1. Alternating initial t ^ . m . k : 60
5.2. Attributive and predicative forms 61
5.3. Reflexive forms 62
5.4. Person marking 64
5.5. Matrix of comparison 66
6. Second set of grammatical and morphological criteria 68
6.1. Negation 68
6.2. Optative mood 68
6.3. Tense 69
6.4. Nominalizing suffixes 70
6.5. Syntactical hierarchization 71
6.6. Reflexive and reciprocal voice 72
6.7. Matrix of comparison 73
7. Third set of grammatical and morphological criteria 75
7.1. Voice 75
7.2. Word formation morphemes 76
7.3. Second person object pronouns 78
7.4. Personal pronouns 79
7.5. Sex marking 82
7.6. Matrix of comparison 82
8. Results of grammatical and morphological comparison 84
9. Results of combined phonological and
morphological comparison 99
References 117
Sumário em portugués 130
