Timbira is a dialect continuum of the Northern Jê language group of the Jê languages ̣(Macro-Jê) spoken in Brazil. The various dialects are distinct enough to sometimes be considered separate languages. The principal varieties, Krahô /ˈkrɑːhoʊ/[2] (Craó), and Canela /kæˈnɛlə/[2] (Kanela), have 2000 speakers apiece, few of whom speak Portuguese. Pará Gavião has 600–700 speakers. Krẽje, however, is nearly extinct, with only 30 speakers in 1995.
Timbira | |
---|---|
Native to | Brazil |
Region | Maranhão, Pará, Tocantins |
Ethnicity | Timbira |
Native speakers | 5,000 (2005–2008)[1] |
Dialects | |
Language codes | |
ISO 639-3 | Variously:ram – Canelaxra – Krahôgvp – Pará Gaviãoxri – Krĩkatíxre – Krẽje |
Glottolog | timb1253 |
Timibira has been intensive contact with various Tupi-Guarani languages of the lower Tocantins-Mearim area, such as Guajajára, Tembé, Guajá, and Urubú-Ka'apór. Ararandewára, Turiwára, Tupinamba, and Nheengatu have also been spoken in the area. Some of people in the area are also remembers of Anambé and Amanajé.[3]
Varieties
editLinguistic varieties of Timbira include:[4]
- Canela (subdivided into Apànjêkra and Mẽmõrtũmre (a.k.a. Ràmkôkãmẽkra)), 2,500 speakers in Maranhão
- Krahô, 2,000 speakers in Tocantins
- Krĩkatí, spoken in Terra Indígena Krikati, Maranhão
- Pykobjê, 600 speakers in Terra Indígena Governador close to Amarante, Maranhão
- Parkatêjê, 12 speakers in Terra Indígena Mãe Maria, Bom Jesus do Tocantins, Pará
- Kỳikatêjê, 9 speakers in Terra Indígena Mãe Maria, Bom Jesus do Tocantins, Pará
- Krẽje, under 30 speakers in Maranhão and Pará
Loukotka (1968)
editLoukotka (1968) divides the Timbira tribes into two groups, Timbirá (Canela) and Krao.[5] The majority are included under Timbira:
- Timbira (Canela)
- Mehin, Tajé (Timbirá)
- Kreapimkatajé (Krepúnkateye)
- Krenjé (Krẽyé)
- Remkokamekran (Remako-Kamékrere, Merrime)
- Aponegicran (Apáñekra)
- Krenkatajé (Canella, Kenkateye)
- Sakamekran (Chacamecran, Mateiros)
- Purekamekran, Makamekran (Pepuxi)
- Apinagé, Karaho (Carauau)
- Menren (Gaviões, Augutjé – only a few words known)
- Meitajé
- Krao
Ramirez et al. (2015)
editRamirez et al. (2015) considers Timbira-Kayapó to be a dialect continuum, as follows:[6]
- Canela-Krahô ↔ Gavião-Krĩkati ↔ Apinajé ↔ Kayapó ↔ Suyá-Tapayuna ↔ Panará-Kayapó do Sul
Apart from Kapiekran, all Krao varieties are recognized by the ISO. Under the Timbira group, Loukotka included several purported languages for which nothing is recorded: Kukoekamekran, Karákatajé, Kenpokatajé, Kanakatayé, Norokwajé (Ñurukwayé). The Poncatagê (Põkateye) are likewise unidentifiable.
Another common convention for division, though geographic rather than linguistic, is Western Timbira (Apinayé alone) vs Eastern Timbira (Canela, Krikatí, Krahô, Gavião, and others).
Gurupy is a river, sometimes used to refer to the Krenye.
Nikulin (2020)
editThis section is empty. You can help by adding to it. (August 2020) |
References
edit- ^ Canela at Ethnologue (18th ed., 2015) (subscription required)
Krahô at Ethnologue (18th ed., 2015) (subscription required)
Pará Gavião at Ethnologue (18th ed., 2015) (subscription required)
Krĩkatí at Ethnologue (18th ed., 2015) (subscription required)
Krẽje at Ethnologue (18th ed., 2015) (subscription required) - ^ a b Laurie Bauer, 2007, The Linguistics Student’s Handbook, Edinburgh
- ^ Cabral, Ana Suelly Arruda Câmara; Beatriz Carreta Corrêa da Silva; Maria Risolta Silva Julião; Marina Maria Silva Magalhães. 2007. Linguistic diffusion in the Tocantins-Mearim area. In: Ana Suelly Arruda Câmara Cabral; Aryon Dall’Igna Rodrigues (ed.), Línguas e culturas Tupi, p. 357–374. Campinas: Curt Nimuendaju; Brasília: LALI.
- ^ Nikulin, Andrey (2020). Proto-Macro-Jê: um estudo reconstrutivo (PDF) (Ph.D. dissertation). Brasília: Universidade de Brasília.
- ^ Loukotka, Čestmír (1968). Classification of South American Indian languages. Los Angeles: UCLA Latin American Center.
- ^ Ramirez, H., Vegini, V., & França, M. C. V. de. (2015). Koropó, puri, kamakã e outras línguas do Leste Brasileiro. LIAMES: Línguas Indígenas Americanas, 15(2), 223 – 277. doi:10.20396/liames.v15i2.8642302