G. Segerer – Atlantic Classification – ACAL 47 A new, innovation-based classification of Atlantic languages Guillaume Segerer (& Konstantin Pozdniakov) LLACAN (CNRS, INALCO), France Berkeley – ACAL47 –

G. Segerer – Atlantic Classification – ACAL 47 Aim of the talk Brief presentation of the languages Previous scholarship Modern data and modern methods Results and illustrations Your comments Content

G. Segerer – Atlantic Classification – ACAL 47 Reconsider Atlantic unity and subgroupings using shared innovations (which, actually, has never been done before...) Aim of the talk

G. Segerer – Atlantic Classification – ACAL 47 The Atlantic region

G. Segerer – Atlantic Classification – ACAL 47 Previous scholarship: Sapir’s 1971 table

G. Segerer – Atlantic Classification – ACAL 47 Sapir’s 1971 table in color G. Segerer - Comparaison et Reconstruction des langues atlantiques - Dakar A : Senegal Languages B : Cangin Languages C : Bak Languages (Lower Casamance) D : Eastern Senegal-Portuguese Guinea Languages Mel Languages E : Nalu 10%-19% <10% 20%-39% >40%

G. Segerer – Atlantic Classification – ACAL 47 Previous scholarship: Wilson 1989 (=Sapir 1971)

G. Segerer – Atlantic Classification – ACAL 47 Lexicostatistics only Data and cognacy judgments not made explicit Example: in Sapir’s table, Gola and Sherbro have 28% lexical similarity. From our own count using data available to Sapir (Westermann 1921 for Gola, Pichl 1967 for Sherbro), only 8 words were judged cognates Previous methods

G. Segerer – Atlantic Classification – ACAL 47 Both Sapir and Wilson used 100-wordlists only (minimal requirement for lexicostatistics) Sapir had a good knowledge of Joola (cf. his 1965 grammar of Joola- Fogny) Wilson had done an extensive survey in Southern Senegal and Guinea Bissau in , collecting wordlist of items for a dozen of languages. He also wrote sketches of Biafada, Bijogo, Temne, Balanta. Previous data

G. Segerer – Atlantic Classification – ACAL languages a selection of 63 lexical sources (of which 41 > 1989, latest classification by Wilson) complete sources instead of wordlists limited to basic lexicon 185,638 words Modern data

G. Segerer – Atlantic Classification – ACAL 47 Modern lexicostatistics – Linguistic phylogeny more data available refined softwares better results expected but still: blackbox effect, generates tree anyway RefLex ( cognate sets creation and management phonetic alignments reconstruction hypotheses cognate sets (not all are valid) Modern methods

G. Segerer – Atlantic Classification – ACAL 47 Phylogeny vs Innovations: the Joola case 1. Unrooted tree (Splitstree software))2. Phonological innovations The two methods yield different pictures. Is this a problem ? KWAATAY KARON KASA FOGNY BANJAL GUSILAY KEERAAK BLISS KWAATAY KARON FOGNY BANJAL KASA BLISS KEERAAK GUSILAY

G. Segerer – Atlantic Classification – ACAL 47 Often based on similarity rather than cognacy > Does not distinguish between innovations and retentions Gives a picture of relative lexical similarity, from which we tend to infer common ancestry Lexicostatistics Illustrates present relationships, mixing common ancestry, contacts, borrowings from outer languages KWAATAY KARON KASA FOGNY BANJAL GUSILAY KEERAAK BLISS

G. Segerer – Atlantic Classification – ACAL 47 Innovations Illustrate historical processes Are less likely to depend from contact May be illustrated by numerous examples Are based on sound correspondences Phonological innovations KWAATAY KARON FOGNY GUSILAY KASA BLISS KEERAAK > Ø *ɬ > s > ɬ (*p>f) BANJAL > r > l (*k>g)

G. Segerer – Atlantic Classification – ACAL 47 Sound correspondences Help find false cognacy Keeraak has subə instead of expected ɬubə > the Keeraak form is probably borrowed from Kwaatay

G. Segerer – Atlantic Classification – ACAL 47 Sound change: a sound s1 in lg A corresponds to s2 in lg B Class reassignment: noun class X in lg A corresponds to noun class Y in lg B. morpho(-phonological) innovations: consonant alternation present in lgs A, B, C but not in lgs X, Y, Z Lexical replacement: same meanings in lgs A and B are rendered by different (and unrelated) forms Semantic shift: same forms in lgs A and B have different (but related) meanings Back to innovations Many kinds of innovations can be seen in the lexicon:

G. Segerer – Atlantic Classification – ACAL 47 Main results in Atlantic classification: what’s kept from Sapir and Wilson? The major split is between NORTH and BAK There are uncontroversial subgroups: Tenda, Cangin, Nyun-Buy, Jaad- Biafada, Joola, Manjaku, Balanta Nalu is most probably in the NORTH branch although evidence is weak

G. Segerer – Atlantic Classification – ACAL 47 Main results in Atlantic classification: what’s different from Sapir and Wilson? Mel languages are not Atlantic (an old statement, see Dalby 1965) T here is no convincing evidence. Lexical cognates are nearly always Niger-Congo retentions. Bijogo belongs to BAK Nice sound correspondences. Wolof cannot be proven to form a subgroup with Fula-Sereer Nyun cannot be proven to form a subgroup with Tenda-Jaad Limba, Gola and Sua are considered isolates, maybe not even Atlantic

G. Segerer – Atlantic Classification – ACAL 47 Our classification

G. Segerer – Atlantic Classification – ACAL 47 Illustration 1 Present in all Atlantic branches Absent from MEL, isolates, and more generally NC languages Two pan-Atlantic innovations

G. Segerer – Atlantic Classification – ACAL 47 Illustration 2 Regular sound correspondences

G. Segerer – Atlantic Classification – ACAL 47 Illustration 3 Exclusive North-Atlantic lexical isoglosses

G. Segerer – Atlantic Classification – ACAL 47 Illustration 4 Exclusive Bak isoglosses

G. Segerer – Atlantic Classification – ACAL 47 Illustration 5: semantic shift Sound correspondences allow to make predictions. Here the Joola form suggest a very ancient Atlantic word that nearly disappeared from Bak but survived in the North with a different meaning

G. Segerer – Atlantic Classification – ACAL 47 MERCI !