NO. 2 MAYA-YUNGA-CHIPAYAN': A NEW LINGUISTIC ALIGNMENT 1

L O U I S A R . S T A R K

UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN

0. Introduction 1. Yunga phonology 2. Relationships of Yunga to other languages 3. The relationship of Yunga to Mayan 3.1. Phonology 3.2. Phonological correspondences 3.2.1. Grammatical considerations 3.2.2. Overall rules 3.2.3. Cognate sets 3.2.3.1. Consonant correspondences 3.2.3.2. Vowel correspondences 3.2.4. Yunga lexical lists 3.3. Grammatical correspondences 3.3.1. Nouns 3.3.2. Verbs 3.4. Conclusions 4. The relationship of Uru-Chipaya, Yunga and Proto-Mayan

0. The purpose of this study is to recon-struct the phonology of an import ant Ameri-can Indian language througli manuscript data, and to show its relationship to certain other American Indian languages.' The lan-guage is Yunga.

Yunga (sometimes called Mochica, Chimu, or Quingnam) was one of the major lan-guages of pre-coiiquest Peru. It was spoken along the north coast and was the language of the Chimu culture (1300-1438). The Chimu, who had one of the highest cultures of pre-Columbian South America, occupied the coastal area between Tumbez in the north and Paramonga (Paramunca) ill the south.1

1 I am grateful for comments from Christopher Day, Eric Hamp, Nicholas Hopkins, Terrenes Kaufman, Ronald Olson, Bruce Stark, and Willard Walker. Responsibility for this paper as it now stands, however, is the author's.

* On the basis of toponyms, certain scholars be-lieve that Yunga was spoken as far north as Ecuador, and extended southwards into northern

Although the Chimu were conquered by the Inca in the early fifteenth century, their language survived; but it was limited to a smaller geographic area. When the Spanish arrived in Peru, they found Yunga spoken in the area of northern Peru which they des-ignated the Bishopric of Trujillo. As recently as ten years ago there were a few speakers of Yunga in Et6n, at the mouth of the Reque River. It is doubtful, however, that any sur-vive today.

With the extinction of Yunga, we are for-tunate to have two fairly comprehensive grammars of the language. The first was written in 1644 by Padre Fernando de la Carrera.3 The author, who was born in Tru-jillo, may have been a native speaker sf Yunga. If not, he at least had ample oppor-tunity to hear it spoken by some 4,000 In-dians in his parisli at Reque, three miles up-stream from Eton.

The second grammar was written by E. W. Middendorf who went to Et<5n in 1890. There, with a thorough knowledge of the Carrera grammar, he wrote his own—even correcting a few 'mistakes' that he found in Carrera.*

There seems to have been little change in Yunga during the almost two hundred and fifty years between the two grammars. In our analysis of Yunga we will treat both grammars as one. For although the earlier Carrera grammar would probably come close to showing the language as it existed before any influence from Spanish, it contains only

Chile and Argentina. For a summary of these views see: Radamgs A. Altieri, La Gram&tica Yunga de F. de la Carrera, Tucuman (1939) pp. 20-22.

1 Fernando de la Carrera, Arte de la lengua Yunga de los valles del Obispado de Trujillo del Peru, Lima (1644).

1 E . W. Middendorf, Das Muchik oder die Chimu-Sprache, Leipzig (1892).

120 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OK AMERICAN LINGUISTICS VOL. XXXVIII

4S1 roots compared to (>81 in Middendorf's grammar. By combining the two, but making carcful note of where they differ, we can ar-rive at a more adequate corpus for compara-tive purposes. Our norm, however, will be the earlier, Carrera, grammar.

1. Both Carrera and Middendorf de-scribed the 'sounds' of Yunga by comparing them to the 'sounds' of languages that they knew: Spanish and Portugese, in the case of Carrera; German, English and Italian for Middendorf. From these descriptions of the 'sounds' of Yunga, and from the distribution of orthography,B we postulate the following hypothetical reconstruction of the phonemic system of Yunga.

YUNGA6

CONSONANTS:7

Lab- Den-Alve-olo- Pala-

tal-ized

Ve-ial u l pal-

atal

Pala-tal-ized lar

Stops Simple P t k

Affricated t 6 5 Fricatives f s 5 ? X

Nasals m 11 ii D Laterals 1 I Resonants r r Semivowels y

VOWELS: Front

High Mid Ix>\v

Central Back u

P o

s For an analysis of the Carrcra-Middendorf orthography, see: Louisa R. Stark, Mayan Affin-ities with Yunga of Peru, Unpubl. Diss, New York University (1968) pp. 10-25.

' For a discussion of allophonic variation in Yunga, see Stark, pp. 10-25.

7 This phonemic system differs rather radically from that of J. P. Harrington in his article Yunga, Language of the Peruvian Coastal Culture, IJAL, X I 24-30 (1945). Harrington reconstructs Yunga with a series of aspirated stops. This reconstruc-tion seems to be based on one grapheme, Carrera's t ih, which we reconstruct as / ( / , a dental affricated stop.

There are no diphthongs or vowel clusters in Yunga.

Neither Carrera or Middendorf mention stress (or accent) in their descriptions of Yunga. However, from noticing the rare places in which stress is marked, we may as-sume that it is nonpredictable, and therefore phonemic. We may also assume that it prob-ably occurred most frequently on the penul-timate syllable (as in Spanish), and that in a few word classes (e.g. the rare places where stress is noted), it could occur on the ulti-mate syllable. The latter include place names such as Eten, Monsefti, Mossopfi, etc. For convenience, we will note stress only in those instances where it does not occur on the penultimate syllable.

Middendorf presents evidence that there was another degree of stress, found on pho-nological phrases. He writes kum6 sugar cane (p. 57) with word stress, but mo kumo ang chi uts The sugar-cane is certainly high. (p. 189) Aside from noting that it occurs, we have no way of reconstructing the rules which probably governed the use of stress in the phonological phrase.

In our data on Yunga, the canonic forms of syllables are CV, VC, and CVC. Exam-ples are: / ox / fire-, /xa/ water; /tea/ heel. There are no word initial or final consonant clusters. However, such sequences, of two units only, may occur medially. Examples are: /atput/ two] /mentop/ full.

2. Yunga has long been considered a mem-ber of a larger family of coastal languages generally called Yunca-Puruhan. Mason out-lines this language family as follows:8

Y U N C A - P U R U H A ( Y U N C A - W A N -

C A V I L C A , P U R U H A - M O C H I C A )

A . YUNCAN 1. North Group (Puruha-Caflari)

a. PuruhA

' J. Aldeu Mason, The Languages of South American Indians, Handbook of South American Indians, VI Julian H. Steward, ed., Washington (1950), pp. 195-196.

NO. 2 MAYA-YUNGA-CHIPAYAN': A NEW LINGUISTIC ALIGNMENT 121

b. Canari c. Manabita (Mantenya)

2. South Group (Yunca) a. Yunga b. Mossop6 c. Eten (?) d. Chimu e. Mochica (Chincha) f. Chanco

B . A T A L A N 1. Wancavilca (Huancavilca)

a. Manta b. Tumbez c. Puna d. Carake, Apichiki, Cancebi

The existence of many of the languages that make up Mason's Yunca-PuruhA fam-ily is quite doubtful. The establishment of several of them rests on statements by early travelers or chroniclers that the language of each of these tribes or areas differed from one another. What these specific differences were is unknown today.

Thus, lexical evidence for these languages is based on the toponyms and patronyms of the areas in which they are presumed to have been spoken. It is on this basis that Jij6n y Caamafio related the 'North Group (Puruh&Cafiari)' of hypothetical languages (or dialects) to Yunga(n).' The same criteria was used by Rivet and Loukotka in relating their AtalAn group of hypothesized lan-guages/dialects to one another.10

Mason's 'South Group (Yuncan)' includes two names which relate to pre-conquest cul-tures (Chimu and Mochica) and three which refer to specific geographical locations (Mos-sop6, Eten, and Chanco). There are, again, no linguistic data for these languages or dialects.

As a result of the complete lack of specific linguistic evidence for establishing the Pu-

' Jacinto Jijdn y Caamafio, Las lenguas del sur de Centro America y el norte y centro del oeste de Sud-America, in: El Ecuador Interandino y Oc-cidental, III, Quito (1943), pp. 88-140.

10 Paul Rivet and Cestmlr Loukotka, Langues de PAm^rique du Sud et des Antilles, Les Langues du Monde, A. Meillet and M. Cohen, eds., Paris (1952), p. 1109.

ruha-Canari and Atalan groups, or for relat-ing them to Yunga, we will assume that Yunga is a language with no discernible af-filiations with any of the other hypotheti-cal languages of Mason's 'Yunga-Puruha' family.

Differing from Mason's classification is that of Schmidt, who classifies a group of Tallan languages with Yunga." His classi-fication has been most recently supported by Tovar, who gives the following outline for Yunga-Puruha

Yunga-Puruha 1. North Group (Purulia-Canari)

a. Puruhi b. Cailari

2. Central Group (Tallan) a. Sec b. Sechura c. Colin d. Catacaos

3. South Group a. Yunga Although Tovar's basis for including the

northern group is based on the same evi-dence as Mason's (both following Jijon y Caamafio), there is a certain amount of lin-guistic data pertaining to the central group. This consists of several short word lists for Sechura, Col&n, and Catacaos. However, an examination of the lists shows no similarities between these languages and Yunga."

We are left with Yunga as a probable iso-late, with no discernible resemblances with any of the languages with which it has been considered immediately related. With this in mind we will now turn to an examination of the wider affiliations which have been postu-lated for Yunga.

There has been a great deal of discussion concerning the wider affiliations of Yunga.

11 Wilhelm Schmidt, Die Sprachfamilien und Sprachenkreise der Erde, Heidelberg (1928), p. 214.

" Antonio Tovar, Cat&logo de las lenguas de America del Sur. Buenos Aires (1961), pp. 162-165.

11 For a more detailed comparison of this data with Yunga see: Stark, pp. 32-37.

1 2 2 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF AMERICAN LINGUISTICS VOL. X X X V I I I

Mason summarizes it as follows: A relationship of Chibcha (Barbacoa, Colorado) has been postulated, but W. Lehmann (1920) compared Mochica (Yunga) with Colorado without any re-sult. Uhle has suggested a relationship with Chipaya (q.v.). Chamberlain pos-tulated a Yunca(n) family.

Dr. J. P. Harrington (personal com-munication) reports that the phonetics are almost identical with Quechua, and that there are many vocables and fea-tures like Quechua."

Of these theories, the two most widely held are that (1) Yunga is a language isolate, and (2) it is related to the Chibcha languages. Besides Chamberlain15 and Brinton," the first view is held by Swadesh" and Tovar,18

and indirectly by McQuown18 who lists Yunga as 'unclassified'.

Regarding a Chibchan affiliation, Yunga is classified as a member of a Macro-Chib-chan phylum by Greenberg80 and Voegelin and Voegelin.21 In both cases Yunga is con-sidered a sister to the Barbacoan family, which includes the Colorado and Cayapa languages. However a scarcity of potential phonological correspondences, together with

11 Mason, p. 194. 11 Alexander Francis Chamberlain, Linguistic

.Stocks of South American Indians, AA, n.8. 15: 236-247 (1913), p. 244.

11 Daniel Garrison Brinton, The American Race: A Linguistic Classification and Ethno-graphic Description of the Native Tribes of North and South America, Philadelphia (1901), p. 226.

17 Morris Swadesh, Mapas de clasificaci6n linguist ica de Mexico y las Americas, 8, Universi-dad Nacional Autonoma do Mexico (1959), p. 19.

" Tovar, pp. 162-105. 19 Normal McQuown, The Indigenous Lan-

guages of Latin America, AA, 57:501-570 (1955), p. 543.

10 Joseph Greenberg, Linguistic Classification of South America, in J. H. Steward and L. C. Faron, Native Peoples of South America, New York (1959), pp. 22-23.

11 C. F. and F. M. Voegelin, Languages of the World: Native America Fascicle Two, Anthro-pological Linguistics, 7:vii (part 1) (1965), pp. 146-147.

rather basic differences in syntax and mor-phology, seem to indicate that Yunga and the Barbacoan Chibcha languages (Cayapa and Colorado) should not be considered sis-ter languages, as is so often postulated.--

We will skip Uhle's suggestion of a rela-tionship between Yunga and Chipaya and return to it later.

In examining Harrington's hypothesis of a Yunga-Quechua relationship, we have found a clear lack of potential phonological, lexical and grammatical correspondences between the two languages. It seems certain that Yunga bears no close genetic relationship to Quechua.18

Thus far we have seen that Yunga does not seem to bear any relationship to any of her neighbors: e.g. the Tallan languages, the Barbacoan (Chibchan) languages, or Que-chua. In looking further afield for possible affiliations, Zevallos Quiiiones hypothesized that Yunga might be related to the Mavan languages of Central America.84 More re-cently this has been supported by Ibarra Grasso.85

3. A reconstruction of proto-Mayan would be the logical data to use in a systematic comparison of Yunga with the twenty-six Mayan languages. And recently Kaufman has published 271 reconstructed forms.85

However, overlap between Kaufman's forms and our own corpus of Yunga totaled 165 items, of which 22 were potential cognates. Such a small number of forms cannot ac-count for the correspondences between the two languages. Beyond this, materials for the re-construction of additional proto-

17 Stark, pp. 40-49. 71 Ibid, pp. 50-55. 74 Jorge Zevallos Quifiones, Toponimia Prein-

caica en el Norte del Peru, Cuadernos de Eetudios, Instituto de Investigaciones Historicas, Pontifica Universidad CafcSlica del Peru, Lima, 2:205-247 (1943), p. 207.

71 Dick E. Ibarra Grasso, Lenguas Indigenas Americanas, Buenos Aires (1958), p. 61.

71 Terrence Kaufman, Teco—A New Mayan Language, IJAL 36.154-174 (1969).

NO. 2 MAYA-YUNGA-CHIPAYAN': A NEW LINGUISTIC ALIGNMENT 123

Mayan forms are simply unavailable. Thus, we have been left with no choice but to compara Yunga with a specific Mayan lan-guage for which there are adequate lexical data: Ch'ol. Although Ch'ol is generally con-sidered one of the more innovating Mayan languages, it was chosen because at first glance it bore a superficial resemblance to Yunga. For both languages have (1) a six-vowel system, (2) no diphthongs, (3) similar syllable shapes, (4) a pre-ponderanco of mono-syllabic roots, and (S) are primar-ily suffixing languages (although items 2 through 5 apply to most of the Mayan lan-

bcr of the Choioid (or Cholan) branch of Mayan. Other members are Chontal, spoken in the state of Tabasco in Mexico, and Chorti spoken on the Guatemalan-Honduras border.

As of 1930, Ch'ol was spoken by some 17,000 Indians in and near Tumbald, Al-lende, Tila, Hidalgo, and Salta de Agua in the state of Chiapas, Mexico. Aulie's dic-tionary of Ch'ol is confined to the dialect spoken in and near TumbaUi, and in the Allende area.

3.1. Following Mrs. Aulie's analysis, the phonemic system of Ch'ol is as follows:

CONSONANTS:

Simple Stops

Affricated

Fricatives

CH'OL30

Bilabial Alveolar Alveolopalatal Velar k

Glottal ?

Laterals Semivowels

VOWELS:

t' t r s n I

Front i e

Central Back High Mid Low guages). Besides these considerations, there is the important practical one of having ample information about Ch'ol in the form of published texts,27 and a microfilmed dic-tionary by Evelyn Woodward Aulie."

According to McQuown,29 Ch'ol is a mem-17 Arabelle Whittaker and Viola Warkentin,

Choi Texts on the Supernatural, Oklahoma (1966).

u Evelyn Woodward Aulie, A Dictionary of Choi, Materials on Mayan Languages in Mexico • • . by Field Workers of the Summer Institute of Linguistics, Microfilm Collection of M.S.'s on Middle American Cultural Anthropology, no. 26, University of Chicago, December 1948.

11 Norman McQuown, The Classification of Mayan Languages, IJAL 22.191-195 (1966), p. 194.

Like Yunga, Ch'ol has six vowels. The /A / represents a mid, open, central unrounded vowel. Ch'ol does not have diphthongs, nor does it have the long vowels of many other Mayan languages. The latter may be com-pensated for by the aspiration which follows many vowels before a consonant. However, we agree with Mrs. Aulie, who interprets such aspiration as a voiced glottal consonant (the / h / on the chart of Ch'ol consonants) which occurs as the initial member of a con-sonant cluster.

Unfortunately, Mrs. Aulie does not pro-10 For a discussion of allophonic variation in

Ch'ol, see Aulie, pp. 2-4.

1 2 4 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF AMERICAN LINGUISTICS VOL. X X X V I I I

vide us with any data on the supra-segmen-tal phonemes of Ch'ol. Therefore, we must leave the analysis of this language and turn to the correspondences between Ch'ol and Yunga.

3.2.1. Before listing the correspondences between Ch'ol and Yunga, we must mention certain elements which have been eliminated from our lexical data in making the compari-sons. These are of three kinds: (]) Affixes which are part of a lexeme:

(a) Prefixes: CH'OL S- (classifier of per-sons and animals) (S)pokok male toad-, po- (masculine gender) §(po)-kok male toad

(b) Suffixes: CH'OL -cokon (position) hok'(Sokon) to tie onto, tie up; -el (verbal suffix) bAhl(el) to set (sun), k'Ak(el) to ascend, walk up, p'ohl(el) to sell; tohm(el) to crack, break; -el (nominal suffix) 6am(el) sickness; -le (transitive) SAk(le) to look for; -ib (instrumental) uk'(ib) windpipe; -Vn (verbal suffix) ^ahk(en) to run; tumb(en) to hurt a thing, tuks(in) to undermine, YUNGA -um (verbal suffix) (iok(um) to run; -Vsak (nom-inalizer) Sam(asak) suffering.

(2) Parts of compound words are: CH'OL ta (clitic indicating time to come) maiS(ta) not yet; yalah (child-like) (yalah)k'ub little finger; YUNGA ^ (tooth) (ff)6an molar; kiS (little) (kiS)ku little finger; le( (greater) (le?)ku thumb; c0k (gentle) yan(c0k) spider

(3) Probable components which, for lack of evidence, cannot be accurately described are: YUNGA (pu)ku owl; (6i)Su breast.

3.2.2. There are certain overall rules which govern correspondences between Ch'ol and Yunga. 1. Ch'ol -V?V-, where V's are identical, cor-

responds to Yunga -V-: Ch'ol we'el meat ; Y.0r meat

2. Ch'ol -VhC- corresponds to Yunga -VC-: Ch. ^ahk(en) to run; Y. jiok(um) to run

3. Ch'ol -CC-, where either C is a nasal, cor-responds to Yunga nasal: Ch. pekno good; Y. pefio good

4. Ch'ol -CC-, consisting of a stop plus non-nasal, corresponds to Yunga stop: Ch. tuks(in) to undermine by digging under-neath; Y. tok- to bore, drill

5. Ch'ol VCV(C) corresponds to Yunga CV(C): Ch. iSan brother of my brother; Y. Sao

3.2.3. In the listing of cognate sets, the Ch'ol form is given first, then the Yunga form. If both forms have the same meaning, this is not repeated.

3.2.3.1. (1) Ch'ol bilabial stop corresponds to Yunga bilabial stop. (a) Ch'ol / p / corresponds to Yunga /p / .

Ch. pekno good; Y. pefio Ch. pak' seed; Y. paxek bean Ch. poho pus; Y. pox spleen, bile Ch. nop to learn; Y. ap-

(b) Ch'ol / p ' / corresponds to Yunga /p / . Ch. p'ohl(el) to sell; Y. pol- to increase Ch. yap' to put out, snuff out; Y. yap- to

cease, stop Ch. nup' to shut, close; Y. nap-Ch. top' to break, smash; Y. t0p- to beat,

hit Ch. Sa'p'ehl two; Y. Sap- to double

(c) Ch'ol / b / corresponds to Yunga /p / . Ch. bal to roll up something; Y. pal

twisted string Ch. sub to tell a thing; Y. sap an order Ch. -ben for (benefactive); Y. pen

(2) Ch'ol alveolar stop corresponds to Yunga dental stop. (a) Ch'ol / t / corresponds to Yunga / t / .

Ch. tal he is coming (defective verb); Y. ta- to come

Ch. ti to, by; Y. tim for, by Ch. tuks(in) to undermine by digging un-

derneath; Y. tok- to bore, drill Ch. top' to break, smash; Y. t0p- to beat,

hit

Ch. tumb(en) to hurt a thing; Y. tun- to beat, hit

Ch. tohm(el) to crack, break; Y. ton- to hit

Ch. at vulva; Y. kat female organ Ch. (Si')lat rib; Y. laft

(b) Ch'ol / t ' / corresponds to Yunga / t / .

NO. 2 M A Y A - Y U N G A - C H I P A Y A N : A N E W LINGUISTIC ALIGNMENT 1 2 5

Ch. t'oh to cut, divide: Y. tox- to dig, bur-row

(3) Ch'ol volar stop, in the environment of an affix," corresponds to Yunga velar fricative. Ch'ol / k / corresponds to Yunga / x / .

Ch. S'ok small, unripe; Y. Sox young (person)

Ch. ok-fire; Y. ox Ch. SAk light, clear; Y. sax dark Ch. kok my foot; Y. xok foot Ch. (Spo)kok (male) toad', Y. xok toad

(4) Ch'ol velar stop, otherwise, corre-sponds to Yunga velar stop. (a) Ch'ol / k / corresponds to Yunga / k / .

Ch. SAk clean, white; Y. ak- to wash Ch. >S'Ak end ; Y. ^ak- pointed Ch. ^ahk(en) to run; Y. ji0k(um) Ch. )!uhk coffee-colored; Y. fiuk- light-

colored Ch. Suk to catch; Y. Sopk- to seize hold of Ch. -ik (intransitivizer); Y. -ik Ch. kAn to know, recognize; Y. kan-Ch. ku owl; Y. (pu)ku Ch. lokok loose skin at back of neck; Y. laktu skin Ch. SAk(le) to look for ; Y. sak- to choose,

select Ch. SAk fork of tree; Y. sanku corner Ch. tuks(in) to undermine by digging un-

derneath; Y. tok- to bore, drill Ch. kok my foot; Y. xok foot Ch. (Spo)kok (male) toad; Y. xok toad Ch. k'Ak(el) to ascend, walk up; Y. kak-

to walk (b) Ch'ol /k ' / corresponds to Yunga / k / .

Ch. ak' to give to; Y. ak- to take care of Ch. k'Ak(el) to ascend, walk up; Y. kak-

to walk Ch. k'as to pass from one side to another;

Y. kaS- to get, receive Ch. k'eS to exchange; Y. keiS- to return

31 ThiB conditioning factor is suggested by Hamp (personal communication: April 6, 1966). See also: Eric P. Hamp, On Maya-Chipayan, UAL, 33.74-6 (1967), p. 75. These affixes would differ from Ch'ol -Vn, -el, etc., where a contiguous velar stop corresponds to Yunga velar stop (See 3.2.3.1, no. 4).

Ch. k'ok to scrape, scratch ; Y. kok- to pull out

Ch. k'ohl- to shake a person; Y. kol- to quarrel

Ch. (yalah)k'ub (little) finger; Y. (kiS)ku Ch. pak' seed; Y. paxek bean Ch. s§ik' to insist; Y. senk- to force Ch. uk'(ib) wind-pipe; Y. uk breath Ch. hok'(Sokon) to tie onto, tie up; Y.

x0k-(5) Ch'ol alveolar affricated stop corre-

sponds to Yunga affricated dental stop. (a) Ch'ol H I corresponds to Yunga /f!/ .

Ch. fiAn cold ; Y. (ian Ch. jiahk(en) to run ; Y. fi0k(um) Ch. Ufi meek; Y. fat little Ch. (iuhk coffee-colored; Y. j!uk- light-

colored (b) Ch'ol I t ' I corresponds to Yunga W .

Ch. ^'u to burrow into; Y. ffufn- to press, push

Ch. ^'Ak end; Y. jiak- pointed Ch. y&t' diarrhea; Y. ya^- to soil, dirty

(6) Ch'ol alveolopalatal affricated unglot-talized stop, before a mid back vowel, corre-sponds to Yunga palatalized alveolopalatal stop.

Ch'ol /S / corresponds to Yunga / j j / . Ch. Sohom sharp blade for shelling corn;

Y. Cax steel Ch. Soh cheek; Y. ijes

(7) Ch'ol alveolopalatal stop, elsewhere, corresponds to Yunga alveolopalatal stop. (a) Ch'ol /S / corresponds to Yunga /£ / .

Ch. Sam(el) sickness; Y. Sam(asak) suf-fering

Ch. (i)San brother of my mother ; Y. San Ch. Sa'p'ehl two; Y. Sap- to double Ch. SiS older sister; Y. SeS sister Ch. Suk to catch; Y. Sopk- to seize hold of Ch. Su? breast ; Y. (Si)Su Ch. hoS- empty ; Y. fakSa poor, barren

(b) Ch'ol /S ' / corresponds to Yunga /S/ . Ch. S'ehl proud; Y. Sernu Ch. S'ok small, unripe; Y . Sox young

(person) Ch. S'uhm squash; Y. Sun Ch. moS'- to make a fist; Y. maSa hand

8 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF AMERICAN LINGUISTICS VOL. X X X V I I I

(8) Cli'ol spirants correspond to Yunga alveolopalatal fricative root or stem final. (a) Ch'ol / » / corresponds to Yunga /§ / .

Cli. k'as to pass from one side In another -, Y. kas- to get, receive

(b) Ch'ol /-V corresponds to Yunga /§/• Ch. k'es to exchange-, Y. kes- to return Ch. mas(ta) not yet; Y. mas perhaps,

maybe (9) Ch'ol spirants, elsewhere, correspond

to Yunga alveolar fricative. (a) Ch'ol / s / corresponds to Yunga / s / .

Ch. usi ynat-like fly; Y. poxsi earth-flea Ch. sAk(le) to look for; Y. sak- to choose,

select Ch. samiyam I am going (defective

verb); Y. sam- to walk Ch. sub U> tell a thing; Y. sap an order Ch. s.\k light, clear; Y. sax dark

(b) Ch'ol /&/ corresponds to Yunga / s / . Ch. s.\k fork of tree; Y. sanku comer Ch. sik' to insist; Y. senk- to force Ch. 5eh vomit; Y. sex mucus Ch. isi there; Y. sin Ch. Sini6 mosquito; Y. senu

(10) Ch'ol glottal fricative, word linal af-ter a mid back vowel, corresponds to Yunga palatalized alveolopalatal fricative.

Ch'ol / h / corresponds to Yunga /£ / . Ch. ioh cheek; Y. $e£ Ch. noli river; Y. ne{

(11) Ch'ol glottal fricative, otherwise, cor-responds to Yunga labio dental or velar fricative. Since there are no conditioning factors to explain this dual correspondence, another explanation must be in order. One possible answer is that *Proto-Mayan *pk

and *x merged to become / h / in Mayan (Ch'ol), whereas the two phonemes in the proto language have the reflexes / f / and / x / respectively in Yunga. Thus Ch'ol / h / , de-rived from *Proto-Mayan *ph and *x would correspond with Yunga / f / and / x / , which are derived from the same proto forms.32

(a) Ch'ol glottal fricative corresponds to

Yunga velar fricative. Ch'ol / h / corresponds to Yunga / x / .

" Ibid., pp. 74-75.

Ch. ahaw lord, patron; Y. axa Ch. seh vomit; Y. sex mucus Ch. t'oh to cut, divide; Y. tox- to dig,

burrow Ch. ha' water ; Y. xa Ch. hok'(6okon) to tie onto, tie up; Y.

x0k-Ch. poho pus; Y. pox spleen, bile

(b) Ch'ol glottal fricative corresponds to Yunga labio-dental fricative.

Ch'ol / h / corresponds to Yunga / f / . Ch. hofi- empty; Y. fak£a poor, barren Ch. hoi head; Y. fal Ch. ho6' to embroider; Y. f0 needle

(12) Ch'ol bilabial nasal, root initial, in-tervocalicallv, or after a mid back vowel, cor-responds to Yunga bilabial nasal.

Ch'ol / m / corresponds to Yunga /m/ . Ch. ame lest; ame thus Ch. om rich; Y. 6am Ch. Jam(el) sickness; Y. {am(asak) suf-

fering Ch. mal inside; Y. mal between Ch. mAsan to swallow; Y. man- to eat,

drink Ch. maS(ta) not yet; Y. mas per/taps,

maybe Ch. mo6'- to make a fist; Y. maf a hand Ch. mahnan to borrow; Y. m0fi- to in-

crease Ch. mul to blame; Y. mul- to slander Ch. samiyam I am going (defective

verb); Y. sam- to walk, travel (13) Ch'ol bilabial nasal, elsewhere, cor-

responds to Yunga dental nasal. Ch'ol / m / corresponds to Yunga / a / . Ch. 6'uhm squash; Y. 6un Ch. lem to lick; Y. letn- to swallow Ch. ia 'am molar; Y. (0)6an Ch. tumb(en) to hurt a thing; Y. tun- to beat, hit Ch. hum(p'ehl) one; Y. un Ch. am spider; Y. yan(60k) Ch. tohm(el) to crack, break; Y. ton- to

hit (14) Ch'ol alveolar nasal, following a con-

sonant, corresponds to Yunga alveolopalatal nasal.

NO. 2 MAYA-YUNGA-CHIPAYAN' : A N E W LINGUISTIC ALIGNMENT 127

Ch'ol / n / corresponds to Yunga / f i / . Ch. ihnam wife', Y. iii- marriageable

woman Ch. malinan to borrow] Y. m0fi- to in-

crease Ch. pekno good; Y. peno

(15) Ch'ol alveolar nasal, word final after a low central vowel, corresponds to Yunga whir nasal.

Ch'ol / n / corresponds to Yunga / o / . Ch. an there is, there are; Y. nan Ch. (i)iSan brother oj my mother-, Y. cao

(16) Ch'ol alveolar nasal, elsewhere, cor-responds to Yunga dental nasal.

Ch'ol / n / corresponds to Yunga /n / . Ch. AU cold; Y. fan Ch. k.\n to know, recognize", Y. kan-Ch. -on I; Y. man me Ch. nup to close, shit-, Y. nap-Ch. neh tail; Y. ne no j anus Ch. noh river; Y. ne§ Ch. -ben for (benefactive); Y. pen Ch. sinii mosquito-, Y. senu

(17) Ch'ol lateral, word final of a bisyl-labic word, or word final following a conso-nant, corresponds to Yunga alveolar reso-nant.

Ch'ol / l / corresponds to Yunga / r / . Ch. 6'ehl proud; Y. 6ernu Ch. -il (nominalizer); Y. -ir Ch. we'el meat; Y. 0r

(18) Ch'ol lateral, as part of a word me-dial consonant cluster, or in the environment of a mid back or any central vowel, corre-sponds to Yunga alveolar lateral.

Ch'ol / l / corresponds to Yunga / ! / . Ch. bAhl(el) to set (sun); Y. al- to des-

cend Ch. -al to talk, say ; Y. al- mouth Ch. hoi head; Y. fal Ch. k'ohl- to shake a person; Y. kol- to

quarrel Ch. (6i?)lat rib; Y. laft Ch. lokok loose skin at back of neck; Y.

laktu skin Ch. mal inside; Y. mal between Ch. bal to roll up something; Y. pal

twisted string

(19) Ch'ol lateral, otherwise, corresponds to Yunga alveolopalatal lateral.

Ch'ol / l / corresponds to Yunga / l / . Ch. lem to lick; Y. letn- to swallow Ch. mul to blame; Y. mul- to slander

(20) Ch'ol palatal semivowel corresponds to Yunga alveolopalatal semivowel.

Ch'ol / y / corresponds to Yunga / y / . Ch. yap' diarrhea; Y. yap- to dirty, soil Ch. yAp' to put out, snuff out; Y. yap-

to stop, cease 3.2.3.2. (1) Ch'ol high front vowel occur-

ring between two consonants corresponds to Yunga mid front vowel.

Ch'ol / i / corresponds to Yunga /<•/. Ch. 6i6 older sister; Y. 6e6 sister Ch. Sik' to insist; Y. senk- to force

(2) Ch'ol high front vowel, elsewhere, cor-responds to Yunga high front vowel.

Ch'ol / i / corresponds to Yunga / i / . Ch. -ik (intransitive); Y. -ik Ch. ihnam wife; Y. ifi- marriageable

woman Ch. -il (nominalizer); Y. -ir Ch. usi gnat-like fly; Y. poxsi earth-flea Ch. iii there; Y. sin Ch. ti to, by; Y. tim for, by Ch. Sini6 mosquito; Y. senu

(3) Ch'ol mid front vowel corresponds to Yunga mid front vowel.

Ch'ol / e / corresponds to Yunga /e / . Ch. ame lest; Y. ame thus Ch. S'ehl proud; Y. iernu Ch. k'eS to exchange ; Y. keS- to return Ch. lem to lick; Y. letn- to swalloui Ch. -ben for (benefactive); Y. pen Ch. pekno good; Y. pefio Ch. neh tail; Y. ne not) anus Ch. §eh vomit ; Y. sex mucus

(4) Ch'ol mid central vowel corresponds to Yunga low central vowel.

Ch'ol /A/ corresponds to Yunga /a / . Ch. s.\k to wash; Y. ak-Ch. fihk end; Y. f ak- pointed Ch. fL\n cold ; Y. f(an Ch. bAhl(el) to set (sun); Y. al- descend Ch. k'Ak(el) to ascend, walk up; Y. kak-

to walk

1 2 8 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF AMERICAN LINGUISTICS VOL. X X X V I I I

Ch k.\n to know, recognize', Y. kan-Ch. mAsan to swallow; Y. man- to eal,

drink Ch. sAk(le) to look for; Y. sak- to choose,

select Ch. SAk fork of tree] Y. sanku corner Ch. yAp' to put out, snuff out; Y. yap- to stop, cease

(5) Ch'ol low central vowel, preceding a glottal fricative plus consonant, corresponds to Yunga mid central vowel.

Ch'ol / a / corresponds to Yunga / 0 / . Ch. mahnan to borrow, Y. m0n- to in-

crease Ch. fiahk(en) to run; Y. )(0k(um)

(6) Ch'ol low central vowel, elsewhere, corresponds to Yunga low central vowel.

Ch'ol / a / corresponds to Yunga / a / . Ch. ahaw lord, patron; Y. axa Ch. ak' to give to; Y. ak- to take care of Ch. -al to talk, say ; Y. al- mouth Ch. Sam(el) sickness; Y. 6am(asak) suf-

fering Ch. (i)6an brother of my mother; Y. <5an Ch. Sa'am molar; Y. (0)6an Ch. 6a?p'ehl two; Y. Jap- to double Ch. at. vulva; Y. kat female organ Ch. k'as to pass from one side to another;

Y. kaS- to get, receive Ch. (6i?)lat rib; Y. laft rib Ch. mal inside; Y. mal between Ch. an there is, there are; Y. naQ Ch. pak' seed; Y. paxek bean Ch. samiyam I am going; Y. sam- to walk,

travel Ch. tal he is coming (defective verb); Y.

ta- to come Ch. ha' water ; Y. xa Ch. am spider; Y. yan(60k) Ch. ya^' diarrhea; Y. yafi- to dirty, soil

(7) Ch'ol high back vowel, where contig-uous to a bilabial stop, corresponds to Yunga low central vowel.

Ch'ol / u / corresponds to Yunga / a / . Ch. nup' to close, shut; Y. nap-Ch. sub to tell a thing; Y. sap an order

(8) Ch'ol high back vowel, when in a closed syllable followed by a velar stop or

alveolar sibilant, corresponds to Yunga mid back vowel.

Ch'ol / u / corresponds to Yunga / o / . Ch. 6uk to catch ; Y. 6opk- to seize hold of Ch. tuks(in) to undermine by digging un-

derneath; Y. tok- to bore, drill Ch. usi gnat-like fly; Y. poxsi earth-flea

(9) Ch'ol high back vowel, elsewhere, cor-responds to Yunga high back vowel.

Ch'ol / u / corresponds to Yunga / u / . Ch. \ii meek; Y. jiuf! little Ch. fiuhk coffee-colored; Y. ^uk- light-

colored Ch. t'u to burrow into; Y. ^ufn- to press,

push Ch. 6u? breast; Y. (6i)6u Ch. 6'uhm squash; Y. iun Ch. (yalah)k'ub little finger ; Y. (kiC)ku Ch. ku owl; Y. (pu)ku Ch. raul to blame; Y. mul- to slander Ch. tumb(en) to hurt a thing; Y. tun-

to beat, hit Ch. uk'(ib) wind-pipe; Y. uk breath Ch. hum(p'ehl) one; Y. un

(10) Ch'ol mid back vowel, preceding a word final glottal fricative, corresponds to Yunga mid front vowel.

Ch'ol / o / corresponds to Yunga / e / . Ch. noh river; Y. ne$ Ch. 6oh cheek; Y. <;(:<;

(11) Ch'ol mid back vowel, before a glottalized consonant or glottal stop, cor-responds to Yunga mid central vowel.

Ch'ol / o / corresponds to Yunga / 0 / Ch. hoi' to embroider; Y. f0 needle Ch. top' to break, smash; Y. t0p- to

beat, hit Ch. hok'(6okon) to tie onto, tie up; Y.

x0k-(12) Ch'ol mid back vowel, contiguous

to a single velar stop or glottal fricative, corresponds to Yunga mid back vowel.

Ch'ol / o / corresponds to Yunga / o / . Ch. { 'ok small, unripe; Y. Sox young

(person) Ch. k'ok to scrape, scratch; Y. kok- to

pull out

NO. 2 MAYA-YUNGA-CHIPAYAN': A NEW LINGUISTIC ALIGNMENT 129

Ch. k'ohl- to shake a person; Y. kol-to quarrel

Ch. ok- fire-, Y. ox Ch. p'ohl(el) to sell; Y. pol- to increase Ch. t'oh to cut, divide; Y. tox- to dig,

burrow Ch. kok my foot] Y. xok foot Ch. (iSpo)kok (mole) toad; xok toad Ch. tohm(el) to crack, break; Y. ton-

to hit Ch. poho pus; Y. pox spleen, bile

(13) Ch'ol mid back vowel, elsewhere, corresponds to Yunga low center vowel.

Ch'ol / o / corresponds to Yunga /a / . Ch. nop to learn; Y. ap-Ch. om rich; Y. 5am Ch. Sohom sharp blade for shelling corn;

Y. gax steel Ch. hoS- empty; Y. fakSa poor, barren Ch. hoi head; Y. fal Ch. lokok loose skin at back of neck;

Y. laktu skin Ch. -on I; Y. man me Ch. moS'- to make a fist; Y. maSa hand

In conclusion, we see that all phonemes in Ch'ol have correspondences in Yunga. However, Yunga / f / and /$/ do not have correspondences in Ch'ol. If we had a large corpus of 'Proto-Mayan for comparative purposes we would probably find corre-spondences for Yunga /? / . However, Yunga / r / has a very low frequency of

YUNGA 1. ak- to take care of 2. ak- to wash 3. al- to descend 4. al- mouth 5. ame thus 6. ap- to learn 7. axa lord, patron 8. flak- pointed 9. ^an cold

10. ji0k(um) to run 11. fiufi little 12. (iuk- light-colored 13. fiufn- to press, push 14. Sam rich

occurrence. We suspect that this may be the result of local borrowings into Yunga.

There are certain overall patterns in the correspondences between the two languages:

(1) There is a merger of simple and glottalized stops in Ch'ol to correspond to stops in Yunga.

(2) Ch'ol sibilants correspond to pala-talized sibilant root or stem final in Yunga; Ch'ol sibilants correspond to unpalatalized sibilant elsewhere in Yunga.

(3) Ch'ol mid back vowel / o / is the conditioning factor for correspondences in Yunga of several Ch'ol consonants: /6, h, m, 1/.

3.2.4. The gross total corpus of Yunga lexical items is approximately 1,742 items. Deleting overlaps and redundancies, the net total is approximately 806 items; of which 691 occur in Middendorf and Car-rera. Of these 89, or a little less than 15 %, appear to be cognate with Ch'ol. These lexemes are listed below, along with the Proto-Mayan form when available.3® The Yunga form is given first, then the Ch'ol and Proto-Mayan forms. If all forms have the same meaning, this is not repeated.

" Proto-Mayan forms are from Kaufman 1969, pp. 168-174, and Terrence F. Kaufman, Linguistic Materials for a Study of the Internal and Externa! Relations of the Mayan Languages, Burg Warten-stein, 1962.

CH'OL ak' to give to SAk clean white bAhl(el) to set (sun) -al to talk, say ame lest nop ahaw ft'Ak end (iAn jiahk(en) u>! meek |!uhk coffee-colored

to burrow into om

*Pl!OTO-MAYAN

*saq

*?a'xa-w

130 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF AMERICAN LINGUISTICS VOL. X X X V I I I

Y U N G A C H ' O L *PROTO-MAYAN

15. 6am(asak) suffering ("am(el) sickness 16. f'atj brother of my mother i£an 17. (0)6an molar ca?am 18. fiap- to double 6a?p'ehl two *ka'>-19. 606 sister fi6 oilier sister 20. 6ernu proud i'ehl 21. fopk- to seize hold of 6uk to catch 22. fox youtig (person) 6'ok small, unripe 23. (6i)£u breast 6u? *6u'' to suckle 24. run squash i'uhm *puh tortilla gourd 25. £ax steel 6ohom sharp blade for shilling

corn 26. (•<'( cheek 6oh 27. fake'a poor, barren ho6- empty 28. fal head hoi 29. f0 needle ho6' to embroider 30. -ik (intransitivizer) -ik 31. in- marriageable woman ihnam wife 32. -ir (nominalizer) -il 33. kak- to walk k'Akfel) to ascend, walk up 34. kan- to know, recognize kAi i

35. kat. female organ at vulva 36. ka£- to get, receive k'as to pass from one side to

another *k'a?s debt

37. kes to return k'es to exchange •k'es 38. kok- to pull out k'ok to scrape, scratch 39. kol- to quarrel k'ohl- to shake a person 40. (kifi)ku little firmer

(leflku thumb (yalah)k'ub

41. (pu)ku owl ku 42. laft rib (ii ')lat 43. laktu skin lokok loose skin at back of neck 44. let.n- to swallow lem to lick *leq' to lick 45. mal between mal inside 46. man- to eat, drink mAsan to swallow 47. man me -on I 48. ma£ perhaps, maybe ma5(ta) not yet 49. mafa hand moi5'- to make a fist 50. m0n- to increase mahnan to barrow 51. mul- to slander mul to blame 52. nai] there is,

there are an

53. nap- to close, shut nup' 54. ne noi) anus neh tail *ge.h 55. ne$ river noh 56. ox fire ok- *q'a.q' 57. 0r meat we'el *vva?

NO. 2 MAYA-YUNGA-CHIPAYAN': A NEW LINGUISTIC ALIGNMENT 131

YUNGA C H ' O L *PROTO-MAYAN

58. pal twisted string bal to roll up something *b'8l 59. paxek bean pak' seed *paxk' pine-cone 60. pen for -ben

(benefactive) 61. pefio good pekno 62. pol- to increase p'ohl(el) to sell 63. pox spleen, bile poho pus *pox 64. poxsi earth-flea usi gnat-like fly *?us fly 65. sak- to choose, SAk(le) to look for

select G6. sam- to walk, travel samiyam I am going (defec-

tive verb) 67. sanku corner SAk fork of tree *suhk corner 68. senu mosquito Sini £ "sen 69. sap an order sub to tell a thing 70. sex dark sAk light, clear *saq white, clean 71. senk - to force §ik' to insist 72. sex mucus Seh vomit 73. sin there i5i 74. ta- to come tal he is coming (defective

verb) •ta.LL]

75. tim for, by ti to, by 76. tok- to bore, drill tuks(in) to undermine by

digging underneath 77. tox- to dig, burrow t'oh to cut, divide 78. t0p- to beat, hit top' to break, smash 79. ton- to hit tohm(el) to crack, break SO. tun- to beat, hit tumb(en) to hurt a thing 81. uk breath uk'(ib) wind-pipe 82. un one hum(p'ehl) *xu-n 83. xa water ha? *ha' 84. xok/oo( kok my foot *?o?k 85. xok toad (Spo)kok (male) toad 86. x0k- to tie onto, tie up hok'(6okon) 87. yan(60k) spider am S8. ya^- to dirty, soil ya^' diarrhea 89. yap- to stop, cease yAp' to put out, muff out

3.3. As HampM lias recently pointed out, a comparison of the surface phonology of two languages is an essential beginning for any demonstration of relatedness. But grammatical considerations should be taken into account if proof of relationship is to be completely acceptable. In this section we will point out certain grammatical

" Hamp, p. 74.

similarities between Ch'ol and Yunga. These are limited by our data. For although both Carrera and Middendorf wrote partial grammatical descriptions of Yunga based on Latin models, a grammar has not been written of Ch'ol. We have managed to outline a sketch of Ch'ol grammar based on the fifty-nine pages of texts presented by Mrs. Aulie at the beginning of her

1 3 2 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF AMERICAN LINGUISTICS VOL. X X X V I I I

dictionary. Combining this with what we know of Yunga grammar, we will attempt to point out certain morphological corre-spondences between the two languages.

Each language luis four classes of words based on their morphological components: nouns, verbs, modifiers and particles. In the following discussion, the first three of these classes are considered together with certain suffixes with which they occur.

3.3.1. Simple noun roots are usually monosyllabic. The most frequent pattern of consonants and vowels within the syllable is CVC: Y. ?eC cheek; Ch. 6oh cheek. Another type of noun root consists of a reduplicated CVC syllabic (NOT root) as in Y. semsem tail, reoreg windpipe; Ch. (S)pekpek frog, lehleh pancreas.

Derived nouns are formed by the addi-tion of certain nominal or nominalizing suffixes to verbs, modifiers, or other nouns. The list which follows includes those affixes which are shared by Yunga and Ch'ol, the forms with which they occur, and as far as possible, the meaning of the resulting form.

The nominal suffix -ir ~ -ur in Yunga occurs with certain verbs: the resultant form indicates an object associated with the action expressed by the verb. Examples are: nap- to sweep, napir a broom; man-to drink, manir a glass; fel- to sit, filur a seat; iiefi- to play, fiefiur a toy. In Ch'ol, the suffix -il occurs with certain verb forms: the resultant form indicates an object associated with the action of the verb; e.g. 6'ahl to adorn, 6'ahlil an adornment; mos to cover, mosil a covering.

In Yunga, the nominal suffix -0r is affixed to intransitive verb stems with the causative suffix -is- to indicate a state of action: 6i- to be, exist, Sis0r will, being; lem-to die, fade away, lemis0r death. In Ch'ol, the nominal suffix -hel never occurs with the causative -es. However, when added to an intransitive verb stem, -hel indicates a state of action: ik'an to become dark, ik'ahel late afternoon, twilight.

The suffix -nem is added to a verb stem, in Yunga, and forms a verbal noun which expresses the purpose of the action: fil-to sing, filnem in order to sing; 6i- to be, exist, einom in order to exist. In Ch'ol, the suffix -e?n occurs with verb stems to form a noun expressing the action of the verb: -oy to give a gift, toye'n giving it.

3.3.2. In both Yunga and Ch'ol, simple verb stems are usually monosyllabic. The most frequent pattern of vowels and con-sonants within the syllable is CVC: Y. t0p- to beat, hit, §ok- to cut, trim, shave; Ch. top' to break, huk' to shave wood.

In Yunga, the suffix -n0m is added to a verb to form a participle: funo- to eat, funon0m eaten. In Ch'ol, the suffix. -em occurs with certain verbs to form par-ticiples: yob' to break, yob'em broken.

A direct command in Yunga may be stated by adding the suffix -an to the verb root: nap- to shut, napan kuf Shut the doorl; fel- to sit, felan Sit down! In Ch'ol, the suffix -an occurs with certain stems to indi-cate a command: iiim to shell (corn), iSman Shell (corn)[

3.3.3. Simple modifiers in each language usually consist of a single syllable: Y. ufi little, fan cold; Ch. u^ meek, ((An cold.

The general superlative of modifiers in Yunga is formed by adding the suffix -is0k to the root: f0s beautiful f0sis0k very beauti-ful. In Ch'ol, reduplicated roots add the suffix -Sa to show greatest degree: 6ak6ak red, (SakSakfe extremely red.

Ch'ol, like other Mayan languages, and Yunga each have a set of numerical classi-fiers. These classifiers are roots which occur after a number and before the noun that it modifies. They generally describe a certain aspect of the noun which they precede. Carrera and Middendorf mention three for Yunga. There may have been more which are unaccounted for in their grammars. Examples of classifiers in Yunga are:

1. pofl for humans, animals: na poo kol ten horses

NO. 2

2. Sokis for fruit, vegetables: na iokis op ten potatoes

3. sop for other inanimate objects: nok sop k0s four days Ch'ol probably has as many as seventy-seven of these qualifiers.38 Examples of a few are as follows:

1. koht for animals: hunkoht one animal 2. tehk for long narrow objects such as

stalks, trees: huntehk one stalk, tree 3. tikil for people: huntikil one person 4. fl'iht for long objects: hunp'iht one

long object 3.4. We can conclude that there are

certain grammatical similarities between Yunga and Ch'ol. It is of particular in-terest that in the morphology, a great num-ber of similarities occur in the form of derivational, rather than inflectional suf-fixes. This may be because derivational affixes take the form of suffixes in both languages. However, in the Mayan lan-guages, most inflectional suffixes take the form of prefixes; in Yunga they are always suffixes. What may have happened is that Yunga, having migrated into a foreign matrix (e.g. Quechumaran) in which most languages are suffixing, slowly shed her inflectional prefixes and replaced them with suffixes. However, her original derivational suffixes were maintained.

4. In 1896 Max Uhle,311 and later J. P. Harrington,37 postulated the relationship between Yunga and Chipaya. Chipaya, with its sister language Uru, is still spoken on the altiplano of Bolivia. Many critics believe that the present speakers of these languages are a small remnant of a very early population which once inhabited a

" This assumption is based on the fact that Chontal, a close sister of Ch'ol and fellow member of the Cholan family, has seventy-seven numeral classifiers. (Kathryn C. Keller, The Chontal (Mayan) Numeral System, IJAL 21.258-75 (1955).)

31 Max Uhle, Uber die Sprache der Uros in Bolivia, Globus 69:19 (1896).

37 Quoted by Mason, p. 224.

133

vast region extending to and including a large area of the Pacific coast.38

Recently, Ronald Olson39 has demon-strated the relationship between Uru-Chipaya and the Mayan languages of Central-America. Olson's articles were later used as the basis of a study by Eric Hamp10

in which he showed that *Proto-Mayan and Uru-Chipaya are sisters; they are both daughter languages of **Maya-Chipayan.

** Mayo-Chipayan

Uru-Chipayan * Proto-Mayan

Since Yunga and Uru-Chipaya are both related to the Mayan languages, we can assume that they are related to one another. The problem is to determine their exact relationship. We may ask whether they are sister languages and thus form a 'Yunga -Chipayan branch of "Maya-Yunga-Chipa-van, as follows:

** Maya-Yunga-Chipayan

*YuNGA-Chipayan 'Proto-Mayan

Or is Yunga more closely related to 'Proto-Mayan, perhaps joining with 'Proto-Mayan to form a branch (*Yunga-Mayan) of "Maya-Yunga-Chipayan?

** Maya-Yunga-Chipayan

* Yt'NGA-Mayan Uru-Chipaya

Or perhaps Yunga and " Maya-Chipavan

34 Jacinto Jij6n y Caamano, Map 3. 31 Ronald D. Olson, Mayan Affinities with

Chipaya of Bolivia I : Correspondences, IJAL 30.313-24 (1964); Mayan Affinities with Chipaya of Bolivia II : Cognates, IJAL 31.29-38 (1965).

" Hamp, pp. 74-76.

MAYA-YUNGA-CHIPAYAN: A NEW LINGUISTIC ALIGNMENT

1 3 4 I N T E R N A T I O N A L J O U R N A L OF A M E R I C A N L I N G U I S T I C S V O L . X X X V I I I

are separate daughter branches of **Maya-Yunga-Chipayan.

** Maya-Yunga-Chipayan

YUNGA ** M a y a - C h i p a y a n

A fourth alternative is that Yunga, itself, might bo a Mayan language, and thus a daughter of *Proto-Mayan.

** Maya-Chipayan

YUNGA (Other Mayan Languages)

Of these three possibilities, the first appears the most probable. For when comparing Yunga with Uru-Chipaya and *Proto-Mayan, we find that it shares considerably more innovations with Uru-Chipaya than with *]'roto-Mayan. These may be seen in the following examples:"

YUNGA U R U - *PROTO-CHIPAYA M A Y A N

1. to re- kon- khufi- *k(')an member

2. string pal pari •b'al (twist-ed)

3. flea cuka cowksmari 4. to kill JUM kan *kam 5. fire ox uh •q 'aq ' 6. foot xok kxohda *?o-q 7. to come ta(n)- thon-8. (old) wo- son0i] son *i>i§nam

man 9. beard sap sip(s) •Sob

10. white §iku SFCO *saq 'white, salty

residue, on ground'

11. to spin pa|- spaht§ *ba<5' thread

12. water xa kxa?

" Materials on *Proto-Mayan are from Kauf-man 1962 and 1969. Materials on Uru-Chipaya

From this list we can see that Yunga and Uru-Chipaya share certain phonological innovations which do not occur in *Proto-Mayan. For example, where Yunga and Uru-Chipaya share a VOICELESS unas-pirated bilabial stop, *Proto-Mayan has a VOICED bilabial s top (nos. 2, 9 and 11) ; where Yunga and Uru-Chipaya have BACK vowels, *Proto-Mayan tends to have CEN-TRAL vowels (nos. 1, 3, 4 and 5 ) ; where Yunga and Uru-Chipaya have LOW central vowels, *Proto-Maya tends to have MID central vowels (nos. 2 and 12). Were there more evidence for all three languages, such innovations would probably be more evident than they are here.

Since Yunga and Uru-Chipaya share innovations which are not found in *Proto-Mayan, we may assume that they are more closely related to one another than to the Mayan languages. This is further supported by the fact that certain lexemes are shared by Yunga and Uru-Chipaya which do not occur in *Proto-Mayan. Examples follow:

YUNOA U R U - *PROTO-CHIPAYA M A Y A N

1. bone koflike kho6i *b'a.q 2. to feel, n0m- non *?abiy,

hear *?ubiy 3 . sun, time, tuni thuni •q'i.q

day 4 . father ef ehp *mam, *tat 5. to want, pik- pek *q'an, *?ax

love, present

6. ripe, old 6uk 6akwa *yix

Another innovation shared by Yunga and Uru-Chipaya is the loss of prefixes which occur in *Proto-Mayan. These have been retained by today's Mayan languages. It is quite possible, though, that Yunga and Uru-Chipaya split off from one another at a time when both languages had pre-fixes. Evidence for this is seen in the reten-tion of certain non-productive (or residual)

come from Olson (1964, 1965) and from Alfred M6traux, Les Indiens Uro-Chipaya de Carangaa; La langue Uru, JSAP, 28.337-394 (1936).

NO. 2 M A Y A - Y U N G A - C H I P A Y A N ' : A N E W L I N G U I S T I C A L I G N M E N T 135

prefixes in Uru-Chipaya. For example:

YUNGA U R U - *PROTO-CHIPAYA MAYAN

1. toad xok skolja *§+k'yuk'y 2. to spin pa|- spahts *s+bac'

thread 3 jaw kaq skena *£+kahlam 4. cornfield skala~ *&+k'wal

$kala *5+kol

The *Proto-Mayan prefix *s- (no. 2) indi-cates an object referent; the *Proto-Mayan prefix (nos. 1, 3 and 4) is a classifier of certain nouns. These prefixes, as sibilants, seem to have been retained in Chipaya when they occurred before a stop. Other-wise they were lost.

Since Yunga and Uru-Chipaya share innovations which are not found in the Mayan languages, we will assume that they are more closely related to one another than to the Mayan languages. Thus we will say that they are sisters, and form a family which we will call *Yunga-Chipayan. This family is in turn a sister to *Proto-Mayan, both sharing a parent in **Maya-Yunga-Chipayan.

" Maya-Yunga-Chipnyan