1887
  1. Home
  2. e-Journals
  3. Diachronica
  4. Volume 34, Issue 1
  5. Article
Volume 34, Issue 1
  • ISSN 0176-4225
  • E-ISSN: 1569-9714
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Definitions of ‘mixed’ or ‘intertwined’ languages derive almost entirely from studies of languages that combine elements from genetically unrelated sources. The Mayan language Tojol-ab’al displays a mixture of linguistic features from two related Mayan languages, Chuj and Tseltal. The systematic similarities found in related languages not only make it methodologically difficult to identify the source of specific linguistic features but also mean that inherited similarity can alter the processes and outcomes of language mixing in ways that parallel observed patterns of code-switching between related languages. Tojol-ab’al, therefore, arguably represents a distinct type of mixed language, one that may only result from mixture involving related languages.

© John Benjamins Publishing Company
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/dia.34.1.02law
2017-04-07
2023-06-08

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.1075/dia.34.1.02law
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Adams, Walter Randolph
    1988 Religious practices of southeastern Chiapas and Tzeltal-Tojolabal interactions. In Lyle Campbell , The linguistics of Southeast Chiapas, Mexico (Papers of the New World Archaeological Foundation 50), 183–198. Provo, UT: New World Archaeological Foundation, Brigham Young University.
     [Google Scholar]
  2. Adell, Eric & Danny Law
    2015 Lexical similarity and the history of Tojol-ab’al. Paper presented atCILLA 7, Austin, Texas, October29–31 2015.
  3. Aissen, Judith
    1987 Tzotzil clause structure. Boston: D. Reidel Publishing Company. doi: 10.1007/978‑94‑009‑3741‑3
     https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-3741-3 [Google Scholar]
  4. 1999 Agent focus and inverse in Tzotzil. Language75(3). 451–485. doi: 10.2307/417057
     https://doi.org/10.2307/417057 [Google Scholar]
  5. Aissen, Judith & Roberto Zavala Maldonado
    (eds.) 2010 La predicación secundaria en lenguas de Mesoamérica. México: CIESAS.
     [Google Scholar]
  6. Auer, Peter
    1999 From code-switching via language mixing to fused lects: Toward a dynamic typology of bilingual speech. International Journal of Bilingualism3(4). 309–332. doi: 10.1177/13670069990030040101
     https://doi.org/10.1177/13670069990030040101 [Google Scholar]
  7. Bakker, Peter & Maarten Mous
    (eds.) 1994 Mixed languages: 15 case studies in language intertwining. Amsterdam: Instituut voor Fundamenteel Onderzoek naar Taal en Taalgebruik.
     [Google Scholar]
  8. Bakker, Peter
    1997 A language of our own: The genesis of Michif, the mixed Cree-French language of the Canadian Métis. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  9. 2003 Mixed languages as autonomous systems. In Yaron Matras & Peter Bakker , (eds.), The mixed language debate: Theoretical and empirical advances, 107–150. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
     [Google Scholar]
  10. Barrett, Rusty
    2002 The Huehuetenango sprachbund and Mayan language standardization in Guatemala. In Mary Andronis , Erin Debenport , Anne Pycha & Keiko Yoshimura (eds.), Proceedings of the 38th Chicago Linguistics Society: The panels, 309–318. Chicago: Chicago Linguistics Society.
     [Google Scholar]
  11. Bricker, Victoria
    1977 Pronominal inflection in the Mayan languages (Middle American Research Institute Occasional Papers 1). New Orleans: MARI, Tulane University.
     [Google Scholar]
  12. Campbell, Lyle & Brant Gardner
    1988 Coxoh. In Lyle Campbell (ed.), The linguistics of southeast Chiapas, Mexico (Papers of the New World Archaeological Foundation 50), 315–338. Provo, UT: New World Archaeological Foundation, Brigham Young University.
     [Google Scholar]
  13. Campbell, Lyle
    1988 The linguistics of southeast Chiapas, Mexico (Papers of the New World Archaeological Foundation 50). Provo, UT: New World Archaeological Foundation, Brigham Young University.
     [Google Scholar]
  14. 1993 On proposed universals of grammatical borrowing. In Henk Aertsen & Robert Jeffers (eds.), Historical linguistics 1989, 91–110. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/cilt.106.08cam
     https://doi.org/10.1075/cilt.106.08cam [Google Scholar]
  15. Campbell, Lyle , Terrence Kaufman & Thomas C. Smith-Stark
    1986 Mesoamerica as a linguistic area. Language62. 530–570. doi: 10.1353/lan.1986.0105
     https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.1986.0105 [Google Scholar]
  16. Contreras García, Irma
    2001 Las etnias del estado de Chiapas. México: UNAM-IIB.
     [Google Scholar]
  17. Curiel Ramírez del Prado, Alejandro
    2007 Estructura de la información, enclíticos y configuración sintáctica en Tojol’ab’al. MA thesis, Centro de Investigaciones y Estudios Superiores en Antropología Social, México.
     [Google Scholar]
  18. Dakin, Karen
    1988 Las lenguas kanjobalanas, polémicas clasificatorias. In Aurora M. Ocampo (ed.), Studia Humanitas: Homenaje a Rubén Bonifaz Nuño, 111–133. México: Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México.
     [Google Scholar]
  19. DeGraff, Michel
    2003 Against creole exceptionalism. Language79(2). 391–410. doi: 10.1353/lan.2003.0114
     https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.2003.0114 [Google Scholar]
  20. 2004 Against creole exceptionalism (redux). Language80(4). 834–839. doi: 10.1353/lan.2004.0178
     https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.2004.0178 [Google Scholar]
  21. Dreyfuss, G. R. & Djoehana Oka
    1979 A new kind of language hybrid?Pacific Linguistics (Series A) 57. 247–274.
     [Google Scholar]
  22. Epps, Patience , John Huehnergard & Na’ama Pat-El
    2013 Introduction: Contact among genetically related languages. Journal of Language Contact6. 209–219. doi: 10.1163/19552629‑00602001
     https://doi.org/10.1163/19552629-00602001 [Google Scholar]
  23. Golovko, Evgeniy V.
    1994 Mednyj Aleut or Copper Island Aleut: an Aleut-Russian mixed language. In Peter Bakker & Maarten Mous (eds.), Mixed languages: 15 case studies in language intertwining, 113–121. Amsterdam: Instituut voor Fundamenteel Onderzoek naar Taal en Taalgebruik.
     [Google Scholar]
  24. 2003 Language contact and group identity: The role of ‘folk’ linguistic engineering. In Yaron Matras & Peter Bakker (eds.), The mixed language debate: Theoretical and empirical advances. 177–207. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
     [Google Scholar]
  25. Haugen, Einar
    1956 Bilingualism in the Americas. American Dialect Society. University, Ala.: University of Alabama Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  26. Haviland, John B.
    1988 It’s my own invention: A comparative grammatical sketch of Colonial Tsotsil. In Robert Laughlin , The great Tzotzil dictionary of Santo Domingo Zinacantan (Smithsonian Contributions to Anthropology Number 31), 79–121. Washington: Smithsonian Institution Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  27. Hopkins, Nicholas
    2006 Review of The linguistics of Maya writing , Søren Wichmann (ed.). Anthropological Linguistics48(4). 404–412.
     [Google Scholar]
  28. Instituto Nacional de Estadística y Geografía (INEGI)
    Instituto Nacional de Estadística y Geografía (INEGI) 2015 Encuesta Intercensalcuentame.inegi.org.mx/poblacion/lindigena.aspx (accessedDec. 26, 2016).
     [Google Scholar]
  29. Justeson, John S. , William M. Norman , Lyle Campbell & Terrence Kaufman
    1985 The foreign impact on Lowland Mayan language and script. New Orleans: Middle American Research Institute, Tulane University.
     [Google Scholar]
  30. Kaufman, Terrence
    1969 Some recent hypotheses on Mayan diversification (Working Paper 26). Language Behavior Research Laboratory, University of California, Berkeley.
     [Google Scholar]
  31. 1971 Tzeltal phonology and morphology. Berkeley: University of California Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  32. 1976 Archaeological and linguistic correlations in Mayaland and associated areas of Meso-America. World Archaeology8(1). 101–118. doi: 10.1080/00438243.1976.9979655
     https://doi.org/10.1080/00438243.1976.9979655 [Google Scholar]
  33. 1990 Algunos rasgos estructurales de los idiomas Mayances con referencia especial al K’iche’. In Nora C. England & Stephen R. Elliott (eds.), Lecturas sobre la lingüística Maya, 59–114. La Antigua Guatemala: CIRMA.
     [Google Scholar]
  34. Kaufman, Terrence & William M. Norman
    1984 An outline of Proto-Cholan phonology, morphology and vocabulary. In John Justeson & Lyle Campbell (eds.), Phoneticism in Mayan hieroglyphic writing (Institute for Mesoamerican Studies 9), 77–166. Albany: State University of New York, Albany.
     [Google Scholar]
  35. Law, Danny
    2009 Pronominal borrowing among the Maya. Diachronica26(2). 214–252. doi: 10.1075/dia.26.2.03law
     https://doi.org/10.1075/dia.26.2.03law [Google Scholar]
  36. 2011 Linguistic inheritance, social difference, and the last two thousand years of contact among Lowland Mayan languages. Ph.D. diss., University of Texas at Austin.
     [Google Scholar]
  37. 2013 Mayan historical linguistics in a new age. Language and Linguistics Compass7(3). 141–156. doi: 10.1111/lnc3.12012
     https://doi.org/10.1111/lnc3.12012 [Google Scholar]
  38. 2014 Language contact, inherited similarity and social difference: The story of linguistic interaction in the Maya Lowlands. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/cilt.328
     https://doi.org/10.1075/cilt.328 [Google Scholar]
  39. Law, Danny , John Robertson , Stephen Houston , Marc Zender & David Stuart
    2014 Areal shifts in Classic Mayan phonology. Ancient Mesoamerica25(2). 357–366. doi: 10.1017/S0956536114000273
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0956536114000273 [Google Scholar]
  40. Lenkersdorf, Gudrun
    1986 Contribuciones a la historia colonial de los Tojolabales. In Mario Humberto Ruz (ed.), Los legítimos hombres: Aproximación antropológica al grupo tojolabal, vol.4, 13–102. Mexico: UNAM.
     [Google Scholar]
  41. López Ixcoy, Candelaria Dominga (Saqijix)
    1997 Ri Ukemiik ri K’ichee’ Chii’: Gramática K’ichee’. Guatemala: Cholsamaj.
     [Google Scholar]
  42. Mateo Toledo, Eladio
    2008 The family of complex predicates in Q’anjob’al (Maya): Their syntax and meaning. Ph.D. diss., University of Texas at Austin.
     [Google Scholar]
  43. Matras, Yaron
    1998 Utterance modifiers and universals of grammatical borrowing. Linguistics36. 281–331. doi: 10.1515/ling.1998.36.2.281
     https://doi.org/10.1515/ling.1998.36.2.281 [Google Scholar]
  44. 2003 Mixed languages: Re-examining the structural prototype. In Yaron Matras & Peter Bakker (eds.), The mixed language debate: Theoretical and empirical advances, 151–175. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. doi: 10.1515/9783110197242.151
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110197242.151 [Google Scholar]
  45. Matras, Yaron & Peter Bakker
    (eds.) 2003 The mixed language debate: Theoretical and empirical advances. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. doi: 10.1515/9783110197242
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110197242 [Google Scholar]
  46. Maxwell, Judith
    1982 How to talk to people who talk funny: The Chuj (Maya) solution. Ph.D. diss., University of Chicago.
     [Google Scholar]
  47. McConvell, Patrick
    2008 Mixed languages as outcomes of code-switching: Recent examples from Australia and their implications. Journal of Language ContactTHEMA 2. 187–212. doi: 10.1163/000000008792525327
     https://doi.org/10.1163/000000008792525327 [Google Scholar]
  48. McConvell, Patrick & Felicity Meakins
    2005 Gurindji Kriol: A mixed language emerges from code-switching. Australian Journal of Linguistics25(1). 9–30. doi: 10.1080/07268600500110456
     https://doi.org/10.1080/07268600500110456 [Google Scholar]
  49. Moravcsik, Edith
    1978 Universals of language contact. In Joseph Greenberg (ed.), Universals of human language, 94–122. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  50. Mous, Maarten
    1994 Ma’a or Mbugu. In Peter Bakker & Maarten Mous (eds.), Mixed languages: 15 case studies in language intertwining, 175–200. Amsterdam: Instituut voor Fundamenteel Onderzoek naar Taal en Taalgebruik.
     [Google Scholar]
  51. Muysken, Pieter
    1981 Halfway between Quechua and Spanish: The case for relexification. In Arnold Highfield & Albert Valdman (eds.), Historicity and variation in creole studies, 52–78. Ann Arbor: Karoma.
     [Google Scholar]
  52. 1994 Media Lengua. In Peter Bakker & Maarten Mous (eds.), Mixed languages: 15 case studies in language intertwining, 207–211. Amsterdam: Instituut voor Fundamenteel Onderzoek naar Taal en Taalgebruik.
     [Google Scholar]
  53. 2000 Bilingual Speech: A typology of code-mixing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  54. Myers-Scotton, Carol
    2000 What matters: The out of sight in mixed languages. Bilingualism, Language and Cognition3. 119–21. doi: 10.1017/S1366728900280218
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S1366728900280218 [Google Scholar]
  55. 2002 Contact linguistics, bilingual encounters and grammatical outcomes. Oxford: Oxford University Press. doi: 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198299530.001.0001
     https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198299530.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  56. 2003 What lies beneath: Split (mixed) languages as contact phenomena. In Yaron Matras and Peter Bakker (eds.), The mixed language debate: Theoretical and empirical advances, 73–106. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
     [Google Scholar]
  57. O’Shannessy, Carmel
    2005 Light Warlpiri: A new language. Australian Journal of Linguistics25(1). 31–57. doi: 10.1080/07268600500110472
     https://doi.org/10.1080/07268600500110472 [Google Scholar]
  58. 2012 The role of code-switched input to children in the origin of a new mixed language. Linguistics50(2). 305–340.
     [Google Scholar]
  59. 2015 Typological and social factors influencing a new mixed language, Light Warlpiri. In Gerald Stell & Kofi Yakpo (eds.), Code-switching between structural and sociolinguistic perspectives, 289–304. Berlin: De Gruyter.
     [Google Scholar]
  60. Polian, Gilles
    2004 Elements de grammaire du Tseltal. Ph.D. diss., Université Paris III: Sorbonne Nouvelle.
     [Google Scholar]
  61. 2007 El sufijo ­uk y la diversificación de la modalidad irrealis en tseltal. Conference on Indigenous Languages of Latin America 3. 1–26. Austin, Texas: CILLA.
     [Google Scholar]
  62. Poplack, Shana
    1980 Sometimes I’ll start a sentence in Spanish y termino en español. Linguistics18. 581–618. doi: 10.1515/ling.1980.18.7‑8.581
     https://doi.org/10.1515/ling.1980.18.7-8.581 [Google Scholar]
  63. Robertson, John S.
    1977 A proposed revision in Mayan subgrouping. International Journal of American Linguistics43(2). 105–120. doi: 10.1086/465466
     https://doi.org/10.1086/465466 [Google Scholar]
  64. 1992 The history of tense/aspect/mood/voice in the Mayan verbal complex. Austin: University of Texas Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  65. Ruz, Mario Humberto
    1981 Los legítimos hombres: Aproximación antropológica al grupo tojolabal, vol.1. Mexico: Centro de Estudios Mayas, UNAM.
     [Google Scholar]
  66. (ed.) 1989 Las lenguas del Chiapas colonial: manuscritos en la Biblioteca Nacional de Paris. Mexico: Instituto de Investigaciones Filologicas, Seminario de Lenguas Indigenas, UNAM.
     [Google Scholar]
  67. Schadeberg, Thilo C.
    1994 KiMwani at the southern fringe of KiSwahili. In Peter Bakker & Maarten Mous (eds.), Mixed languages: 15 case studies in language intertwining, 239–244. Amsterdam: Instituut voor Fundamenteel Onderzoek naar Taal en Taalgebruik.
     [Google Scholar]
  68. Schumann, Otto G.
    1981 La relación lingüística Chuj-Tojolabal. In Ruz, Mario Humberto (ed.), Los legítimos hombres: Aproximación antropológica al grupo Tojolabal, 129–169. Mexico: Centro de Estudios Mayas, UNAM.
     [Google Scholar]
  69. 1983 Algunos aspectos de la relación Chuj-Tojolabal. In Lorenzo Ochoa & Thomas A Lee. Jr. (eds.), Antropología e historia de los Mixe-Zoques y Mayas: Homenaje a Frans Blom, 355–363. México: Universidad Autónoma de México; Provo, UT: Brigham Young University.
     [Google Scholar]
  70. Smith-Stark, Thom
    1978 The Mayan antipassive: Some facts and fictions. In Nora C. England (ed.), Papers in Mayan linguistics, 169–187. Columbia, MO: University of Missouri.
     [Google Scholar]
  71. Stolz, Thomas
    2003 Not quite the right mixture: Chamorro and Malti as candidates for the status of mixed language. In Yaron Matras & Peter Bakker (eds.), The mixed language debate: Theoretical and empirical advances, 271–314. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
     [Google Scholar]
  72. Thomason, Sarah
    2001 Language contact: An introduction. Edinburgh: University of Edinburgh Press. doi: 10.1016/B0‑08‑043076‑7/03032‑1
     https://doi.org/10.1016/B0-08-043076-7/03032-1 [Google Scholar]
  73. 2003 Social factors and linguistic processes in the emergence of stable mixed languages. In Yaron Matras & Peter Bakker (eds.), The mixed language debate: Theoretical and empirical advances, 21–40. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
     [Google Scholar]
  74. Thomason, Sarah & Terrence Kaufman
    1988 Language contact, creolization, and genetic linguistics. Berkeley: University of California Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  75. Van Bree, Cor
    1994 The development of so-called Town Frisian. In Peter Bakker & Maarten Mous (eds.), Mixed languages: 15 case studies in language intertwining, 69–82. Amsterdam: Instituut voor Fundamenteel Onderzoek naar Taal en Taalgebruik.
     [Google Scholar]
  76. Wichmann, Søren
    2006 Mayan historical linguistics and epigraphy: A new synthesis. Annual Review of Anthropology35. 279–294. doi: 10.1146/annurev.anthro.35.081705.123257
     https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.anthro.35.081705.123257 [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/dia.34.1.02law
Loading
Language mixing and genetic similarity
Diachronica 34, 40 (2017); https://doi.org/10.1075/dia.34.1.02law
/content/journals/10.1075/dia.34.1.02law
/content/journals/10.1075/dia.34.1.02law
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): code switching; language contact; Mayan languages; mixed language; similarity; Tojol-ab’al

Most Cited

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error