Evolution of Alignment in Timbira

Alves, Flávia de Castro

doi:10.1086/658054

Cited by 26 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 42 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Macro‐Jê was established only recently as a legitimate family, in part through the comparative work of Davis (1966, 1985), and more recently in work by Rodrigues (1999a, 2000c, 2002; Rodrigues and Cabral 2007); the actual relationship of the various putative branches to the family is still in some doubt (see Ribeiro 2006). While a tentative internal classification was proposed in Rodrigues (1999a: 167–168), this was made only on geographic grounds (distinguishing Eastern, Central, and Western branches), and work on internal genetic classification is currently in its initial phases (Ribeiro 2007, forthcoming; Castro Alves forthcoming; see Ribeiro and van der Voort forthcoming). Ribeiro and van der Voort (forthcoming) have recently presented evidence that the Jabuti family of Rondônia (southwest Brazil) constitutes an additional branch of the Macro‐Jê family, and Adelaar (forthcoming) argues likewise for Chiquitano (Bolivia and Brazil).…”

Section: Relationships Due To Common Descentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Language Classification, Language Contact, and Amazonian Prehistory

Epps

2009

Language and Linguist. Compass

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The linguistic map of Amazonia presents a startling jumble of languages and language families. While some families – most notably Carib, Arawak, Macro‐Jê, and Tupí– are distributed widely throughout the region, their spread is interspersed with many dozens of tiny, localized families and language isolates, particularly in the Amazonian periphery. At the same time, distributions of lexical, grammatical, and phonological features suggest that this linguistic patchwork is overlaid in places by contact regions, where multilingualism has fostered lexical and/or structural resemblances among languages. This complex distribution of languages and linguistic features presents many challenges to our understanding of Amazonian prehistory. How did Amazonia's language families arrive at their present distribution? Why did some families spread over huge distances, while others came to occupy only tiny geographical pockets or are limited to a single language? What kinds of interactions among peoples led to the formation of contact zones, and how are these regions defined? Complicating these questions further is the fact that very little is known about many Amazonian languages, and relationships among them are in many cases a matter of conjecture. This article surveys our current understanding of language classification and language contact in Amazonia, and addresses various perspectives concerning the implications of these relationships for Amazonian prehistory.

show abstract