Lisimba, Mukumbuta 1982

Lisimba, Mukumbuta. 1982. A Luyana Dialectology (Africa, Zambia). Ann Arbor: UMI. (Doctoral dissertation, Madison: University of Wisconsin; 620pp.)

@phdthesis{36939,
  address               = {Ann Arbor},
  author                = {Lisimba, Mukumbuta},
  pages                 = {620},
  publisher             = {UMI},
  school                = {Madison: University of Wisconsin},
  title                 = {A Luyana Dialectology (Africa, Zambia)},
  year                  = {1982},
  abstract              = {Problem. Position of the Luyana Group. Luyana was classified by Guthrie (1948) in Zone K, together with Kwangari, Lozi and the Chokwe-Luvale group of languages. Due to the scarcity of data, Zone K languages have been classified in a number of conflicting ways ranging from the inclusion in Zone K of Subia and Totela, languages of the Tonga group, to missubclassification of some dialects within the group itself. As a result of this, neither the general status of Zone K nor the position of Luyana relative to the neighboring languages been clearly established. Focus of the Present Work. The aim of the present study is two-fold: to reclassify the Luyana group relative to other neighboring Bantu languages, mostly within the Zambian context, on the one hand, and establish internal subdivisions of the group, on the other. External relationships are established primarily at the lexical level, while with internal relationships the focus is on dialectal variations with respect to morphophonemics, lexicon, grammar and tone. Method. The corpus of this comparative study was gathered by means of a questionnaire. Since the main consideration was to describe Luyana as a member of the Bantu family generally, and as a unique group particularly, the questionnaire was framed to elicit plentiful data on the nominals for establishing noun classes and concord systems characteristic of Bantu in general, and also to test the distribution of some features, as vowel copying, characteristic of Luyana. Luyana was specifically compared with six 'control' languages of Zones K, L, M, including Luvale(K.14), Mbunda(K.15), Kaonde(L.41), Lunda(L.52), Nkoya(L.32) and Bemba(M.52). Conclusion. Externally, Luyana is an isolate group but which has more affinities with the Angolan languages to the west and southwest than with the group of languages to the northeast. Further, the Chokwe-Luvale languages classified in Zone K appear to be natural members of Zone L, belonging to the Lunda-Luba branch. Internally, Luyana is a dialect continuum, but which is divided into two major clusters (eastern, western) distinguished mostly at the lexical and phonologic levels.},
  class_loc             = {PL8474.L78},
  degree                = {PhD},
  digital_formats       = {PDF 18.06Mb image-only PDF},
  document_type         = {B},
  fn                    = {africa\lisimba_luyana1982.pdf, africa\lisimba_luyana1982_o.pdf, africa/lisimba_luyana1982_o.pdf},
  guldemann_location    = {TG (1-18,147-205,234-267) /// K2 LK/28},
  hhtype                = {overview;comparative},
  inlg                  = {English [eng]},
  keywords              = {;caf;saf;zmb;lng;lcl;phn;bnt;k.31;k.14;k.15;l.41;l.52;l.32;m.42;ths;},
  lgcode                = {Kwangali [kwn], Mbowe [mxo], Kwandi = Luyana [lyn], Kwangwa = Luyana [lyn], Simaa [sie], Mashi (Zambia) [mho], Mbukushu [mhw]},
  macro_area            = {Africa},
  mpi_eva_library_shelf = {PL 8474 .L78 LIS 2005},
  mpifn                 = {luyana_lisimba1982_o.pdf},
  notes                 = {With 'comparative data' from Luvale K14, Mbunda K15, Kaonde L41, Lunda L52, Nkoya L32 and Bemba M52.},
  source                = {DAI-A 43/06, p. 1958, Dec 1982},
  src                   = {eballiso2009, guldemann, hh, mpieva, weball},
  subject               = {LANGUAGE, LINGUISTICS (0290)},
  subject_headings      = {Luyana language, Luyana language},
  umi_id                = {8220883}
}
TY  - THES
AU  - Lisimba, Mukumbuta
PY  - 1982
DA  - 1982//
TI  - A Luyana Dialectology (Africa, Zambia)
PB  - Madison: University of Wisconsin
CY  - Ann Arbor
KW  - caf
KW  - saf
KW  - zmb
KW  - lng
KW  - lcl
KW  - phn
KW  - bnt
KW  - k.31
KW  - k.14
KW  - k.15
KW  - l.41
KW  - l.52
KW  - l.32
KW  - m.42
KW  - ths
AB  - Problem. Position of the Luyana Group. Luyana was classified by Guthrie (1948) in Zone K, together with Kwangari, Lozi and the Chokwe-Luvale group of languages. Due to the scarcity of data, Zone K languages have been classified in a number of conflicting ways ranging from the inclusion in Zone K of Subia and Totela, languages of the Tonga group, to missubclassification of some dialects within the group itself. As a result of this, neither the general status of Zone K nor the position of Luyana relative to the neighboring languages been clearly established. Focus of the Present Work. The aim of the present study is two-fold: to reclassify the Luyana group relative to other neighboring Bantu languages, mostly within the Zambian context, on the one hand, and establish internal subdivisions of the group, on the other. External relationships are established primarily at the lexical level, while with internal relationships the focus is on dialectal variations with respect to morphophonemics, lexicon, grammar and tone. Method. The corpus of this comparative study was gathered by means of a questionnaire. Since the main consideration was to describe Luyana as a member of the Bantu family generally, and as a unique group particularly, the questionnaire was framed to elicit plentiful data on the nominals for establishing noun classes and concord systems characteristic of Bantu in general, and also to test the distribution of some features, as vowel copying, characteristic of Luyana. Luyana was specifically compared with six ’control’ languages of Zones K, L, M, including Luvale(K.14), Mbunda(K.15), Kaonde(L.41), Lunda(L.52), Nkoya(L.32) and Bemba(M.52). Conclusion. Externally, Luyana is an isolate group but which has more affinities with the Angolan languages to the west and southwest than with the group of languages to the northeast. Further, the Chokwe-Luvale languages classified in Zone K appear to be natural members of Zone L, belonging to the Lunda-Luba branch. Internally, Luyana is a dialect continuum, but which is divided into two major clusters (eastern, western) distinguished mostly at the lexical and phonologic levels.
ID  - 36939
U1  - Ph.D. thesis
ER  - 
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<modsCollection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/mods/v3">
<mods ID="36939">
    <titleInfo>
        <title>A Luyana Dialectology (Africa, Zambia)</title>
    </titleInfo>
    <name type="personal">
        <namePart type="given">Mukumbuta</namePart>
        <namePart type="family">Lisimba</namePart>
        <role>
            <roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">author</roleTerm>
        </role>
    </name>
    <name>
        <namePart>Madison: University of Wisconsin</namePart>
        <role>
            <roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">degree grantor</roleTerm>
        </role>
    </name>
    <originInfo>
        <dateIssued>1982</dateIssued>
        <place>
            <placeTerm type="text">Ann Arbor</placeTerm>
        </place>
    </originInfo>
    <typeOfResource>text</typeOfResource>
    <genre authority="marcgt">thesis</genre>
    <genre>Ph.D. thesis</genre>
    <abstract>Problem. Position of the Luyana Group. Luyana was classified by Guthrie (1948) in Zone K, together with Kwangari, Lozi and the Chokwe-Luvale group of languages. Due to the scarcity of data, Zone K languages have been classified in a number of conflicting ways ranging from the inclusion in Zone K of Subia and Totela, languages of the Tonga group, to missubclassification of some dialects within the group itself. As a result of this, neither the general status of Zone K nor the position of Luyana relative to the neighboring languages been clearly established. Focus of the Present Work. The aim of the present study is two-fold: to reclassify the Luyana group relative to other neighboring Bantu languages, mostly within the Zambian context, on the one hand, and establish internal subdivisions of the group, on the other. External relationships are established primarily at the lexical level, while with internal relationships the focus is on dialectal variations with respect to morphophonemics, lexicon, grammar and tone. Method. The corpus of this comparative study was gathered by means of a questionnaire. Since the main consideration was to describe Luyana as a member of the Bantu family generally, and as a unique group particularly, the questionnaire was framed to elicit plentiful data on the nominals for establishing noun classes and concord systems characteristic of Bantu in general, and also to test the distribution of some features, as vowel copying, characteristic of Luyana. Luyana was specifically compared with six ’control’ languages of Zones K, L, M, including Luvale(K.14), Mbunda(K.15), Kaonde(L.41), Lunda(L.52), Nkoya(L.32) and Bemba(M.52). Conclusion. Externally, Luyana is an isolate group but which has more affinities with the Angolan languages to the west and southwest than with the group of languages to the northeast. Further, the Chokwe-Luvale languages classified in Zone K appear to be natural members of Zone L, belonging to the Lunda-Luba branch. Internally, Luyana is a dialect continuum, but which is divided into two major clusters (eastern, western) distinguished mostly at the lexical and phonologic levels.</abstract>
    <subject>
        <topic>caf</topic>
    </subject>
    <subject>
        <topic>saf</topic>
    </subject>
    <subject>
        <topic>zmb</topic>
    </subject>
    <subject>
        <topic>lng</topic>
    </subject>
    <subject>
        <topic>lcl</topic>
    </subject>
    <subject>
        <topic>phn</topic>
    </subject>
    <subject>
        <topic>bnt</topic>
    </subject>
    <subject>
        <topic>k.31</topic>
    </subject>
    <subject>
        <topic>k.14</topic>
    </subject>
    <subject>
        <topic>k.15</topic>
    </subject>
    <subject>
        <topic>l.41</topic>
    </subject>
    <subject>
        <topic>l.52</topic>
    </subject>
    <subject>
        <topic>l.32</topic>
    </subject>
    <subject>
        <topic>m.42</topic>
    </subject>
    <subject>
        <topic>ths</topic>
    </subject>
    <identifier type="citekey">36939</identifier>
</mods>
</modsCollection>