Ethiosemitic languages: Classifications and classification determinants

Feleke, Tekabe Legesse

doi:10.1016/j.amper.2021.100074

Cited by 12 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This contact significantly influenced the Western and Northern dialects because of a long history of contact between these dialects and the Ethiopian Semitic languages (also see Clamons 1992). The Northern and Western Oromo dialects have centuries of history of contact with Ethiosemitic languages such as Amharic, Argobba and Tigrigna (see Appleyard 2015; Blench 2013; Crass & Meyer 2011; Feleke 2021; Feleke, 2023; Leslau 1945), and with Omotic languages (see Clamons 1992; Mous 2012). Of all these, the contact between Amharic, and the Western and Northern Oromo dialects is extremely relevant given that Amharic and Oromo also share an extended boundary (see Figure 2) and that they are spoken by millions of speakers.…”

Section: Gender Variation Across the Oromo Dialectsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Gender variation across the Oromo dialects: A corpus‐based study*

Feleke

Lohndal

2023

Studia Linguistica

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study aims to (1) demonstrate the position of the Oromo gender system in Corbett's (1991) typology of gender; (2) illustrate major syntactic gender variation across the Oromo dialects; (3) identify factors that contributed to the gender variation, and (4) illustrate the morphosyntax of the Oromo gender system. The data obtained from the Oromo Speech Corpus shows a high degree of lexical and syntactic variation between the Western‐Northern dialects on the one hand, and the Eastern‐Southern dialects on the other hand. The Western and Northern dialects have shifted from the historically Cushitic phonology‐based gender assignment pattern to the semantic‐based assignment pattern. This shift has resulted in a widespread neutralization of feminine gender markers. The contact between Oromo and the neighboring non‐Cushitic languages contributed to these changes. The study also argues that Kramer's (2015) morphosyntactic approach can be extended to the analysis of Oromo gender system.

show abstract

Section: Gender Variation Across the Oromo Dialectsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Gender variation across the Oromo dialects: A corpus‐based study*

Feleke

Lohndal

2023

Studia Linguistica

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Despite being classified as Semitic, the Gurage languages also display distinctive linguistic traits that set them apart from other Semitic languages spoken in the area. Linguists classify the Gurage languages as belonging to the Semitic branch within the Afroasiatic family based on linguistic features, shared vocabulary, and historical connections between these languages (Feleke 2021). Significant linguistic variation may be seen in the Gurage languages themselves, with numerous dialects being used by diverse Gurage populations.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Adverbial Clause Construction in Dobbi

Hassen,

Asfawwesen

2024

J. Univers. Lang.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article focuses on adverbial clause construction in Dobbi language. Dobbi is a member of the Ethio-Semitic subgroup within the Gurage language family which is mostly spoken in the Southern Nations, Nationalities, and People's Region (SNNPR). Dobbi is one of the least researched and documented languages in the Gurage language family, which is why this study is being done. It is important to note that this study lacks any theoretical foundation, and its data analysis strictly adheres to a descriptive approach. The study

show abstract

“…In most cases, whether certain varieties are dialects or languages is adjudicated based on non-linguistic parameters. For instance, the clusters of Gurage varieties that are spoken in the southwest of Ethiopia are considered 'languages', although most speakers of the varieties effectively communicate (see Feleke et al 2020;Feleke 2021;Gutt 1980;Hetzron 1972;Menuta 2015). Similarly, Norwegian, Swedish, and Danish are mutually intelligible, but they are referred to as 'Scandinavian languages' (Gooskens 2007;Gooskens and Swarte 2017).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Dialect Recognition via Lexical Processing: Is It a Viable Litmus Test?

Feleke

2024

Languages

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

For decades, linguists have been working to formulate an objective means of distinguishing dialects from languages, but dialect recognition has largely remained a subjective enterprise. Only recently have some studies proposed a processing-based psycholinguistic approach toward dialect recognition. These studies argued that dialect words are stored as a co-dependent representation, not as an independent representation of the words of bilingual speakers. Based on these studies, we investigated the lexical selection and processing mechanisms of bilingual and bidialectal speakers of two understudied languages, Oromo and Amharic, using the picture–word interference paradigm. We found independent lexical representations for both the bilingual and the bidialectal groups, which implies the involvement of the same cognitive mechanisms in both language and dialect processing. Thus, we argue that bidialectal speakers have flexible lexical representation and selection mechanisms that are dependent on the speakers’ previous language experience. Here, we propose a dynamic lexical selection model that accommodates diverse dialect ecologies.

show abstract

Ethiosemitic languages: Classifications and classification determinants

Cited by 12 publications

References 25 publications

Gender variation across the Oromo dialects: A corpus‐based study*

Gender variation across the Oromo dialects: A corpus‐based study*

Adverbial Clause Construction in Dobbi

Dialect Recognition via Lexical Processing: Is It a Viable Litmus Test?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About