Misplaced Pages

#558441

16-773: A larger family called Macro-Chibchan , which would contain the Misumalpan languages , Xinca , and Lenca , was found convincing by Kaufman (1990). Based primarily on evidence from grammatical morphemes, Pache (2018, 2023) suggests a distant relationship with the Macro-Jê languages . Jolkesky (2016) notes that there are lexical similarities with the Andaki , Barbakoa , Choko , Duho , Paez , Sape , and Taruma language families due to contact. The extinct languages of Antioquia , Old Catío and Nutabe have been shown to be Chibchan (Adelaar & Muysken, 2004:49). The language of

32-471: A Maya–Yunga–Chipayan macrofamily hypothesis. The yunga form is mentioned in the work of Fernando de la Carrera , " yunca " is another form mentioned by varieties of Quechua, " muchic " is only mentioned by the Augustinian father Antonio de la Calancha in 1638, in 1892 Ernst Middendorf it germanizes as " muchik ", the form " chimu " is a hypothesis on the part of Middendorf in accordance with

48-576: A Chibchan-Paezan stock with Barbacoan , Chibchan, Chocoan , Jirajaran , and the isolates Betoi , Kamsá ( Sibundoy ), Yaruro , Esmeraldeño , Mochica , Cunza , Itonama , and Yurumanguí . An automated computational analysis ( ASJP 4) by Müller et al. (2013) also found lexical similarities between Chibchan and Misumalpan . However, since the analysis was automatically generated, the grouping could be either due to mutual lexical borrowing or genetic inheritance. Constenla (2005) reconstructed five vowels and eleven consonants for Proto-Lenmichian, with

64-599: A misinterpreted Kuna vocabulary, was actually Chocoan , but there is little evidence. The Cofán language (Kofán, Kofane, A'i) of Ecuador and Colombia has been erroneously included in Chibchan due to borrowed vocabulary. On the basis of shared grammatical innovations, Pache (2023) argues that Pech is most closely related to the Arhuacic languages of northern Colombia, forming a Pech-Arhuacic subgroup. Internal classification by Jolkesky (2016): ( † = extinct) Below

80-435: Is a full list of Chibchan language varieties listed by Loukotka (1968), including names of unattested varieties. Pache (2018) is the most recent reconstruction of Proto-Chibchan. Other reconstructions include Holt (1986). Proto-Chibchan reconstructions by Constenla (1981): Proto-Chibchan horticultural vocabulary (Constenla 2012): Proto-Chibchan reconstructions by Pache (2018): Macro-Chibchan Macro-Chibchan

96-637: Is a proposed grouping of the languages of the Lencan , Misumalpan , and Chibchan families into a single large phylum ( macrofamily ). The Lencan and Misumalpan languages were once included in the Chibchan family proper, but were excluded pending further evidence as that family became well established. Kaufman (1990) finds the Chibchan–Misumalpan connection convincing, if as yet unsubstantiated, though Campbell (1997) finds it doubtful. The Xincan family

112-487: Is not proven that it was spoken by those of the Moche culture , and it is ruled out that it was spoken by the chimos , since it is proven that they spoke Quingnam . The only varieties are according to each researcher who compiled their vocabulary, so we have the variety of Ernst Middendorf , Compañon , Bruning , etc. According to the list of the vicar of Reque and author of the aforementioned Art, Fernando de la Carrera,

128-646: The Tairona is unattested, apart from a single word, but may well be one of the Arwako languages still spoken in the Santa Marta range. The Zenú a.k.a. Sinú language of northern Colombia is also sometimes included, as are the Malibu languages , though without any factual basis. Adolfo Constenla Umaña argues that Cueva , the extinct dominant language of Pre-Columbian Panama long assumed to be Chibchan based on

144-574: The Trumai , Arawak , Kandoshi , Muniche , Barbakoa , Cholon-Hibito , Kechua , Mapudungun , Kanichana , and Kunza language families due to contact. Jolkesky (2016) also suggests that similarities with Amazonian languages may be due to the early migration of Mochica speakers down the Marañón and Solimões . It is proven and accepted by linguists that it was spoken by those of the Sican culture , it

160-414: The following reflexes: There are also a series of nasal vowels. Below is a comparison of selected basic vocabulary items. Mochica language Mochica is an extinct language formerly spoken along the northwest coast of Peru and in an inland village. First documented in 1607, the language was widely spoken in the area during the 17th century and the early 18th century. By the late 19th century,

176-514: The knowledge of that time in the 19th century, when he considered Mochica as a language of the Chimos, but which is currently discarded because it is clearly the Quingnam language . An informal group called by linguistics neo-mochica uses the artificial form " muchik ", when the most historically used form is " mochica " or " yunga ". Jolkesky (2016) notes that there are lexical similarities with

SECTION 10

#1732766052559

192-982: The language is a single tonada , Tonada del Chimo , preserved in the Codex Martínez Compañón among many watercolours illustrating the life of Chimú people during the 18th century: 1st voice: Ja ya llũnch, ja ya llõch Ja ya llũnch, ja ya lloch [ sic ] In poc cha tanmuisle pecan muisle pecan e necam 2nd voice: Ja ya llũnch, ja ya llõch Ja ya llũnch 1st voice: E menspocehifama le qui ten que consmuiſle Cuerpo lens e menslocunmunom chi perdonar moitin Roc 2nd voice: Ja ya llõch Ja ya llũnh,[sic] ja ya llõch 1st voice: Chondocolo mec checje su chriſto po que si ta mali muis le cuer po[sic] lem. lo quees aoscho perdonar me ñe fe che tas 2nd voice: Ja ya llũnch, ja ya llõch Ja ya llũnch, ja ya llõch Quingnam , possibly

208-477: The language was dying out and spoken only by a few people in the village of Etén , in Chiclayo . It died out as a spoken language around 1920, but certain words and phrases continued to be used until the 1960s. Mochica is usually considered to be a language isolate , but has also been hypothesized as belonging to a wider Chimuan language family. Stark (1972) proposes a connection with Uru–Chipaya as part of

224-880: The peoples who in 1644 spoke the Mochica language were as follows: Mochica is typologically different from the other main languages on the west coast of South America , namely the Quechuan languages , Aymara , and the Mapuche language . Further, it contains rare features such as: Some suffixes in Mochica as reconstituted by Hovdhaugen (2004): Some examples of lexical items in Mochica from Hovdhaugen (2004): Possessed and non-possessed nouns in Mochica: Locative forms of Mochica nouns: Quantifiers in Mochica: Mochica numerals: The only surviving song in

240-549: The same as Lengua (Yunga) Pescadora, is sometimes taken to be a dialect, but a list of numerals was discovered in 2010 and is suspected to be Quingnam or Pescadora, not Mochica. It was common in the 19th century to relate Mochica mainly to Mandarin, Japanese and Quechua. Currently it is discarded and is considered an isolated language . A simple way to check this is to use its our fathers for comparative linguistic purposes: The Gestión de Cultura of Morrope in Peru has launched

256-636: Was once included in Macro-Chibchan, but this is now doubtful. Constenla (2005) calls this proposed phylum Lenmichí (Lencan–Misumalpan–Chibchan) and provides 85 cognate sets which exhibit regular sound correspondences among the three families. He suggests that Chocoan may be related as well. Greenberg proposed a broader conception of Macro-Chibchan, one dismissed by linguists working on the families in question. It included Yanomam , Purépecha , and Cuitlatec in addition to Chibchan–Misumalpan–Xinca–Lenca. Greenberg (1987) included Paezan languages in

#558441