|
Blin Orthography: A
History and an Assessment
Paul D. Fallon
University of Mary
Washington
1. Introduction (1)
Blin (2) is a Central
Cushitic language spoken by an estimated 90,000 in Eritrea, concentrated
in the‘ Anseba region around Keren. Blin speakers comprise roughly 2% of
the Eritrean population, and Blin is one of nine national languages in
Eritrea. Most speakers are bilingual in the Semitic languages Tigrinya
or Tigre, and many know Amharic, Arabic, and/or English as well. Abbebe
(2001) is an excellent assessment of Blin language vitality and
sociolinguistics. The language policy of the Eritrean government is to
encourage mother-tongue education fornative speakers of each of its nine
ethnolinguistic groups through primary school (Chefena, Kroon and
Walters 1999). When this was implemented for the Blin in 1997, the
government provided Blin curricular materials in the language using a
new Roman-based alphabet. This overturned a 110-yeartradition of writing
Blin in Ethiopic script. This paper will focus on the history of writing
in Blin, and examine the linguistic and sociolinguistic factors of each
writing system. For more on language planning in Blin in general, see
Fallon (2006).Before proceeding, I will adopt the following definitions
from Daniels (2001). An alphabet is aw riting system “in which each
character stands for a consonant or a vowel” (44). A syllabary is a
system “in which each character stands for a syllable” (43), in contrast
to the system used in Ethiopian Semitic languages, an abugida, “in which
each character stands for a consonant accompanied by aparti cular vowel,
usually /a/, and other vowels (or no vowel) are indicated by consistent
additions to the consonant symbols” (44). An example of the first two
characters in the Blin abugida are given in(1), in which each order (or
vowel peak of the syllable) is listed across, and each combining
consonan tis listed in a column. The sixth order is ambiguous between a
coda consonant and onset plus / /.(1)1 2 3 4 5 6 7u i a eoh= h hu hi ha
he h/h hol= l lu li la le l/l loIn the examples, it is fairly easy to
discern a consistent base shape for each character, to which modifying
strokes are added. For example, the second order (/-u/) adds a short
horizontal stroke to the right of the middle of the character, while the
seventh order (/-o/) adds a small loop to the right. In other cases,
however, as in the third order, the character may be modified to
accommodate the vowe lstroke, as in the vertical stroke for /hi, ha,
he/.1An earlier version of this paper was presented at the Fourth
Cushitic-Omotic Conference held in Leiden in 2002.This research was
supported in part by a Howard University New Faculty Grant, and a Howard
Faculty Research grant. I am indebted to Sulus Beyed and the Ministry of
Education in Asmara for their cooperation. I am also grateful to
Kiflemariam Hamde for providing some articles, especially Kiflemariam
(1996). Of course, the view sherein are my own, as are any mistakes.2The
spelling here is the native speaker preference in English, by both
supporters of Romanization and the abugida, as well as the spelling of
the language in the new Roman orthography. In the academic literature,
the language is also spelled Bilin, Bilen, B lin, etc.© 2006 Paul D.
Fallon. Selected Proceedings of the 36th Annual Conference on African
Linguistics, ed. OlaobaF. Arasanyin and Michael A. Pemberton, 93-98.
Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Proceedings Project.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Page 2
2. Blin in Abugida The earliest published form of Blin may be found in
Sapeto (1857), a Catholic mission report which contains a multilingual
vocabulary list. The Blin (also called Bogos, after the region) is given
in both Ethiopic abugida and an Italianized Romanization. A few
examples, along with the two modern orthographies, are given
below:(2)Dio ‘God’(jar) Giar(modern /dar/(jar)) Capello ‘hair’( jbok)
Sciaibok(modern /b k/ (shébék))Naso ‘nose’ (k’onba) Qomba(modern
/k’umba, k mba/ (qumba)) Tre ‘three’( sk a) Sekua( modern /sex a/
(sekhwa))As with any first effort, the results were mixed, and obviously
there was L1 interference in perceptionin several cases, while in
others, the sounds were captured accurately in the abugida but
transliterated incorrectly, as in the labialized velar fricative in the
last example for Sapeto’s ‘three’ .The first substantive use of abugida
for Blin was in Reinisch’s (1882a) translation of the Gospel of Mark,
with slight modifications for sounds unique to Blin; for a critique of
this translation, see Kiflemariam (1986). This was followed by valuable
scholarly work in the form of Reinisch’s grammar(1882b). Texts in
Reinisch (1883) are mostly in transcription, but in abugida there is the
story of Joseph from Genesis and twenty chapters of stories of Jesus,
both with facing German translation .Reinisch’s (1887) dictionary is in
transcription, but related Tigre and G z (Ge‘ez or Gz) forms are given
in the source script. The last two sources in this period are Conti
Rossini (1907), which includes19 pages of untra nslated texts of Blin
history and songs or dance-poems. Capomazza (1911) contains aversion of
Conti Rossini’s first tale, along with an Italian translation.The first
text initiated by a native speaker is the Catholic catechism translated
from Tigrinya byFr. Wolde- Yohannes Habtemariam (1939), highly praised
by Kiflemariam Hamde (1986) for its good Blin and phonetic accuracy.
Many other religious materials were translated in the 1970s, 1980s,
and1990s, including the four Gospels (from G z, Amharic, and English),
prayer books, the Mass, and special services such as Palm Sunday. In the
late 1970s and early 1980s, a group of native Blin speakers, many of
them students in Asmara, began working towards standardization of the
orthography, the compilation of a dictionary, and primers to teach the
language to Tigrinya speakers and children growing up in the diaspora.
Foremost among these intellectuals is Kiflemariam Hamdé, whose 1986
paper contains a wealth of material, including sociolinguistic analysis,
brief grammatical sketch, and a collection of two multi-stanza poems.
Kiflemariam’s (1996) paper is a brief annotated bibliography of the
development ofBlin orthography during this time. In 1992 Kiflemariam
and Paulos produced the first monolingual dictionary of Blin using
abugida, a work of 5,000 words, along with English glosses. In the
diaspora, Bogos (1992) produced a brief volume of love poems. In
Eritrea, the Committee for Developing Blin Language and Culture (1997)
produced a well-regarded volume on various Blin customs which
Sulus(1999) describes as an “inspiring” volume that “embraces attractive
cultural and traditional values an dpractices”, and is kept in the home
of “practically everyone who speaks Blin at home or abroad”. There have
also been a few proposals for minor orthographic changes and
refinements. More recently, Daniel Yacob (2004), in collaboration with
Blin speaker Tekie Alibeket, has pushed the Blin versionof the abugida
into the computer age with computer encoding now accepted in Unicode
4.1. We turn next to an assessment of this writing system. UNESCO has
proposed the principal that “if possible, the writing of a local
language should agree with that of the regional, national, or official
language, so as to facilitate transition from one to the other”
(1972:704 [1953]). Tigrinya, the unofficial language of the Eritrean
government3is spoken by3There is no national language of Eritrea. Its
three working languages are Tigrinya, Arabic, and English, the language
of higher education. Chefena, Kroon, and Walters (1999:486) point out
that Tigrinya is “a symbolic official language in Eritrea; it represents
the state of Eritrea in the sense that its revitalisation is associated
with the success of the national liberation struggle, which accommodated
Tigrigna linguistic nationalism.”94
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Page 3
approximately 50% of the population, and it is written in the Ethiopic
abugida. The use of the Blin abugida therefore follows UNESCO's general
principal. There are, of course, a few characters in the Tigrinya
abugida not native to Blin, and a few Blin sounds such as the plain and
labialized velar nasa lsand velar fricatives which have had to be
introduced to accommodate Blin phonology in writing. Those few Tigrinya
speakers who wish to learn Blin will have little orthographic
difficulty. More importantly, Blin who must learn the national language
would have an easier time learning the 35basic characters (each in seven
orders, one for each following vowel), along with the six modified
character bases for labialized sounds, for a total of 275 character
shapes (Mulugeta 2001).In addition, the only Blin dictionary is written
in abugida, providing easy standardization. Virtually everything written
in Blin before 1996 was written in abugida, and thus there is over a
century of tradition in writing Blin that way. Finally, another argument
in favor of the Blin abugida is that it economically represents in one
character < > frequent Blin sounds such as the labialized velarfricative
/x/, which is a common inflectional ending.Nevertheless, some of the
shortcomings of this sytem have been pointed out. The same criticismof
the abugida for Amharic (Bender, Head and Cowley 1976, Bloor 1995,
Getatchew 1996) also applyto the Blin abugida. First, the sixth order is
potentially ambiguous between a consonant and consonant plus /- /
combination. While Blin syllable structure was an aid to disambiguate
certain sequences, language change has created novel consonant clusters
in the language, as represented by the name of the language itself,
which was usually transliterated from /b lin/. With a newer syncope
rule, the more typical pronunciation (and hence Romanization) is with an
onset cluster: / blin / (Fallon 2001). Again,as in Amharic or Tigrinya,
there is no overt way of representing gemination of consonants, which
can form minimal pairs, as pointed out by Sulus (1999):(3) awet
‘where’awwet ‘above’ qwali‘see!’qwalli ‘I didn’t see’ defena ‘bury this!
(pl.)’ defenna ‘to bury’ As Zeraghiorghis (1999:16) notes, this
ambiguity creates greater homonymy of certain words in the abugida,
which are disambiguated in the Roman orthography:(4)‘to hide or banish’
<sherebbna>‘carpentry’<sherrebna>‘mat making’<sherebna>There have been
proposals for disambiguating diacritics in abugida, but they are not
widely used. Another argument against the abugida is the claim that it
is harder to learn than an alphabet. Kiflemariam and Paulos’ system, for
example, contains 186 symbols for Blin, versus the Romana lphabet for
Blin, which, as we shall see, contains 25 letters (plus digraphs and tri
graphs). However, I have seen no citation in the literature that
abugidas make literacy more difficult than alphabets. A more compelling
objection to the abugida is a sociolinguistic one. Zeraghiorghis (1999)
point edout that Muslim Blin refuse to accept the abugida to write Blin
because they associate it with the Christian religion. (Most speakers of
Tigrinya are Christian, and their liturgical language is usually G z,
which is also written in abugida). Eritrea is roughly 50% Christian and
50% Muslim. The Blin are 30-50% Christian, and 50-70% Muslim, though
those most interested in the language seem to bepre dominantly
Christian. Chefena et al. (1999:483) also note that the abugida is
received “with less enthusiasm by some Tigre speakers on religious and
socio cultural grounds rather than because of its phonological
inadequacy”.3. Blin in the Roman Alphabet Upon its independence in 1993,
Eritrea’s constitution provided for a policy of mother-tongue education
in primary school for each of its nine ethnic groups, from three major
language families: the Semitic languages Tigrinya (50%), Tigre (31.4%)
and Rashaida (Hijazi) Arabic (0.5%); Cushitic languages Saho (5%), Afar
(5%), Beja (2.5%), Blin (2.1)%; and Nilo-Saharan languages Kunama (2%)95
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Page 4
and Nara (1.5%) (percentage figures from U.S. Department of State 2005).
A policy decision by the Erirean government required all non-Semitic
languages to use a Roman-based alphabet. The use of such an alphabet is
said to make an easier transition to English-language education, which
is used exclusively in secondary and higher education. The alphabet also
represents a compromise between those who associate the Arabic script
with Islam and the abugida with Christianity (Zeraghiorghis1999).
Nevertheless, this decision was a blow to those who had invested much
intellectual energyr efining the representation of Blin in abugida.
However, according to a relatively small survey of 100Blin from
different walks of life, the Roman script was preferred by 64%, the
abugida by 28%, andArabic script by 8% (Zeraghiorghis 1999).After a few
years of delay in implementing a primary curriculum for Blin, in part
because of alack of trained personnel, in 1996 the Eritrean Ministry of
Education formed the Blin panel in the Department of General Education.
In 1996-1997 a dialect survey was conducted (Daniel and Sullus1997) in
order to determine intelligibility between various dialects, and the
report concluded that there was a high degree of mutual intelligibility
to permit one set of curricular materials, but that care should be taken
to include dialect terms from the two main dialects. The following year,
a pilot program withsix teachers and 230 children began mother tongue
instruction in Blin in the village of Ajerbeb. Sulus(1999) reports that
in elementary schools in Blin areas in which instruction was in Tigrinya
or Arabic, the pass rate was 60%, with a substantial dropout rate. In
Ajerbeb, however, 83% of the children passed, and only 2% dropped out.
This was rightly deemed a success, and instruction quickly expanded in
1998-1999, when Blin was used as the medium of instruction in 27 primary
schools, abou thalf of which are run by the Catholic Church. Language,
math, and science texts are available ingrades 1-5, along with civics
and geography for upper elementary students. The Blin alphabet contains
25 letters, two of which involve diacritics: <ñ> is for the velar nasal
/ /(unlike the palatal nasal in Spanish) and <é> represents the high
central vowel / /. The 25 letters used are a, b, c, d, e, f, g, h, i, j,
k, l, m, n, ñ, o, q, r, s, t, u, w, x, y, é. The values of these are
related to the IPA except for:(5) <c> = [ ], as in Somali<j> = [d], as
in English<x> = [ ], as in Somali<y> = [j], as in English<ñ> = [ ]
(unique)<é> = [ ] (unique) There are 9 digraphs, which are used to
represent labials, ejectives, and fricatives:(6) labialization: ñw [ ],
kw [k], qw [k], gw [ ]ejection: ch [t ], qh [k], th [t]frication: kh
[x], sh []The letter <h> is an independent letter representing the
glottal fricative /h/, but as the second element in diacritics, it
repesents ejection after stops, except for after <k>, when it represents
a velar fricative, and, as in English, after /s/ it represents the
alveopalatal fricative / /. Again, with possible English influence, the
digraph <ch> represents /t/, but bears no regular relation to <c> / /.
There are two trigraphs, derived compositionally: the labialized velar
fricative: <khw> [x] and the labialized vel arejective: <qhw> [k].The
canonical alphabetical order appears to have undergone some flux during
its brief development. In the Eritrean Ministry of Education (n.d.)
chart “The Alphabets”, most but not all digraphs and trig raphs are
placed at the end, after single letters:(7) a, b, c, d, e, f, g, h, i,
j, k, l, m, n, ñw, o, q, r, s, t, u, w, x, y, é, ñ, ch, kh, qh,sh, th,
kw, qw, khw, qhw, gw.The order of the “Blina Xaleget” (alphabet in the
first grade primer Eritrean Ministry of Education1997b) is:96
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Page 5
(8) vowels: e, u, i, a, é, oconsonants: b, c, d, f, g, h,j, k, l, m, n,
p, q, r, s, t, v, w, x, y, z, ñ, ñw, th, ch, sh, kh, kw, hw,qw, gw.The
revised order (Sulus p.c.) does not treat digraphs as separate letters,
as in traditional Spanish <ll>,but integrates them fully into
alphabetical order letter by letter, not phoneme by phoneme: a, b, c,
ch,d, e, é, f, g, gw, etc. Transcription is overall close to surface
phonemics, not morphophonemics. For example, as mentioned above, Blin at
least traditionally did not permit branching onsets. Through a syncope
rule, most unstressed vowels between a stop and liquid are syncopated,
thereby creating onset consonant clusters. The language reflects this
possible restructuring: /b ln/[blin] <Blin> ‘Blin’. Occasionally,
however, an earlier spelling like <suñw> ‘name’, reflecting the
pronunciation /su /, is changed to something like <séñw> /s /, which
reflects a factoring away of the process of labial spread, by which
labialized consonants spread rounding to adjacent vowels (Fallon
2001).4. Conclusion Digraphia, according to DeFrancis, is “the use of
two or more different systems of writing the sam elanguage” (1984:59;
see Grivelet 2001 for current work). Dale (1980) notes that during the
transition period between writing systems, “a period of synchronic
digraphia may be expected”. Indeed, although there is a half-hour daily
Blin radio show, its announcers read their scripts in abugida. Only the
teachers and educational personnel, and children under 13 are truly
familiar with this writing system. Thus in practice, Blin is in a
digraphic situation. In addition, Blin abroad, especially in Scandanavia
and Britain (e.g. Mowes 2003), use the abugida, in part to better
integrate their children into the general culture of the
Tigrinya-dominated Eritrean diaspora. Dale also observes that “if a new
script is introduced for purposes of efficiency or modernization, the
older script may continue for some time in more traditional uses.” Thus
we might expect the Catholic mass, services, and Gospels to resist being
cast in the Roman alphabet, for some time, especially since new
transliterations take time. Furthermore, due to lack of resources, the
Ministry of Education has not yet produced a Roman script dictionary,
which would help standardize spelling, and give added authority to the
new script. The current situation is therefore balanced between an older
system using abugida with over a century of tradition, and with a
standard dictionary, and a newer, Roman script with official backing,
being taught in elementary schools, but still lacking alexicographic
standard and many adult users.Cases of digraphia are particularly
interesting since “they indicate situations of competition between
forces, no one of which has been able to prevail against the others”
(Dale 1980). Another generation will help determine whether Blin
develops synchronic digraphia, or whether it was simply diachronic
digraphia, a period of transition. But the most important thing,
however, is that the language is being taught, and literacy is being
promoted. It remains to be seen whether native speakers will begin
developing post literacy materials and literary works in the new script,
or whether they willcontinue the modest corpus in abugida.
ReferencesAbbebe Kifleyesus. 2001. Bilin: Speaker status strength and
weakness. Africa 56:1.69-89.Bender, Marvin L., Syndney W. Head, and
Roger Cowley. 1976. The Ethiopian writing system. In Language In
Ethiopia, ed. by M.L. Bender, J.D. Bowen, R.L. Cooper, and C.A.
Ferguson, 120-29. London: Oxford University Press. Bloor, Thomas. 1995.
The Ethiopic writing system: A profile. Journal of the Simplified
Spelling Society 2.30-36.Bogos Goitom. 1992. Enkeli. [Love poems].
Uppsala: Nyna Tryckeri. Capomazza, Ilario. 1911. Un testo bileno.
Revista Degli Studi Orientali 4.1049-56.Chefena Hailemariam, Sjaak
Kroon, and Joel Walters. 1999. Multilingualism and nation building:
Language and education in Eritrea. Journal of Multilingual and
Multicultural Development 20.475-93.97
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Page 6
Committee for Developing Blin Language and Culture in Keren. 1997.
Gerbesha: On Blin and culture. Asmara: Sabur Printing House. Conti
Rossini, Carlo. 1907. Racconti e canti bileni. Actes du XIVeCongrès
International des Orientalistes, Alger1905, Vol. 2, 331-94. Paris:
Ernest Leroux. Dale, Ian R. 1980. Digraphia. International Journal of
the Sociology of Language 26.5-13.Daniel Teclemariam, and Sullus Beyed.
1997. Blin dialect survey. Report by the Blin Language Panel. Asmara:The
Eritrean Ministry of Education .Daniels, Peter T. 2001. Writing systems.
The handbook of linguistics, ed. by Mark Aronoff and Janie
Rees-Miller,43-80. Oxford: Blackwell. DeFrancis, John. 1984. Digraphia.
Word 35.59-66.Eritrean Ministry of Education. 1997a. Bilen: Our spelling
book: An orthography of the Blen language. TestVersion A. Asmara.
Eritrean Ministry of Education. 1997b. Blina gab selfa mé-ébéd. Xétam
selfukhw. [Bilin Language. First Grade.First Edition.] Asmara:
Publishing Unit of the Department of General Education. Eritrean
Ministry of Education. N.d. The alphabets. Asmara .Fallon, Paul D. 2001.
Some segmental processes in Bilin. Proceedings of the 27th Annual
Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society Special Session on Afro
asiatic Linguistics (March 22-25, 2001), ed. by Andrew Simpson,49-60.
Berkeley: Berkeley Linguistics Society. Fallon, Paul D. 2006. Language
development in Eritrea: The case of Blin. Paper presented at the
Georgetown University Round Table on Languages and Linguistics (GURT
2006). Washington, DC, 5 March 2006.Getatchew Haile. 1996. Ethiopic
writing. In The world’s writing systems, ed. by Peter Daniels and
William Bright, 569-76. New York: Oxford Univ. Press. Grivelet, Stéphane
(Ed) 2001. Digraphia: Writing systems and society. International Journal
of the Sociology of Language 150.Kiflemariam Hamdé. 1986. Bilin language
project: The origin and development of Bilin. Asmara: Asmara University,
Institute of African Studies. Asmara University. Unpublished Research
Paper. Kiflemariam Hamde. 1996. Recent developments in Blin writing
(1975-1994). Timsa ’ Mengst’ke/ Adveniat Regnum Tuum
64:2.80-84.Kiflemariam Hamde and Paulos Zeremariam (eds.) 1992. Blina
k’olata /endba (/englised d w ste). [Blin dictionary (with English
translations).] N.p.: Nina Tryckeri. Mowes Ghebre Adem. 2003. Blina m
har s na. [Learning Blin. Book 1]. London. Mulugeta Girmay Melles.
2001. Tigrinya reader and grammar. Springfield, VA: Dunwoody Press
.Reinisch, Leo (Ed.) 1882a. Wengel Marqos: Gospel of Mark in Bilin
or Bogos language. Trans. by Stefanos .Vienna: British & Foreign Bible
Society. Reinisch, Leo. 1882b. Die Bilin- Sprache in Nordost -Afrika.
Sitzungsberichte Der Kaiserlichen Akademie Der Wissenschaft,
Philosophisch-Historisch Klasse, 94.2:583-718. Vienna: Gerold Sohn.
Reinisch, Leo. 1883. Texte Der Bilin- Sprache. Leipzig: Griebens.
Reinisch, Leo. 1887. Wörterbuch Der Bilin -Sprache. Vienna. Sapeto,
Giuseppe. 1857. Viaggio e Missione Cattolico Fra i Mensâ, i Bogos i
gli Habab. Rome: Propaganda Fide. Sulus Beyed Awed. 1999. The Blin
language: Prospects and challenges in introducing Blin as a medium of
instruction. London: University of London School of Oriental and African
Studies MA Thesis. UNESCO. 1953. The use of vernacular languages in
education: The report of the UNESCO meeting of specialists,1951. Paris.
Extract of Pp. 45-75 reprinted in Readings in the Sociology of Language,
ed. by Joshua Fishman,688-716. The Hague: Mouton, 1972.U.S. Department
of State. 2005. Background note: Eritrea. <http://www.
state.gov/r/pa/ei/bgn/2854.htm>.Wolde- Yohannes Habtemariam. 1939. Awni
mehadxwn a. [Who created us?]. The Vatican. Second Edition,1982. Asmara:
Francescana Printing Press. Yacob, Daniel. 2004. Revision of the N1846
Proposal to add Extended Ethiopic to the BMP of the UCS. 16April 2004.
<ra.dkuug.dk/JTC1/SC2/WG2/docs/n2747.pdf>.Zeraghiorghis Mengistu. 1999.
Blin language development in vocabulary and orthography: Case study of
the Blin radio program and adoption of the Latin script. Asmara:
University of Asmara Department of English Thesis,11 May 1999.98
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Page 7
Selected Proceedings of the 36thAnnual Conference on African
Linguistics: Shifting the Center of Africanism inLanguage Politics and
Economic Globalization edited by Olaoba F. Arasanyin and Michael A.
Pemberton Cascadilla Proceedings Project Somerville, MA 2006Copyright
information Selected Proceedings of the 36th Annual Conference on
African Linguistics :Shifting the Center of Africanism in Language
Politics and Economic Globalization© 2006 Cascadilla Proceedings
Project, Somerville, MA. All rights reserved ISBN 1-57473-414-8 library
binding A copyright notice for each paper is located at the bottom of
the first page of the paper. Reprints for course packs can be authorized
by Cascadilla Proceedings Project. Ordering information Orders for the
library binding edition are handled by Cascadilla Press.To place an
order, go to www.lingref.com or
contact: Cascadilla Press, P.O. Box 440355, Somerville, MA 02144,
USAphone: 1-617-776-2370, fax: 1-617-776-2271, e-mail:
sales@cascadilla.com Web
access and citation information This entire proceedings can also be
viewed on the web at www.lingref.com.
Each paper has a unique document #which can be added to citations to
facilitate access. The document # should not replace the full citation.
This paper can be cited as:Fallon, Paul D. 2006. Blin Orthography: A
History and an Assessment. In Selected Proceedings of the 36thAnnual
Conference on African Linguistics, ed. Olaoba F. Arasanyin and Michael
A. Pemberton, 93-98.Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Proceedings
Project.or:Fallon, Paul D. 2006. Blin Orthography: A History and an
Assessment. In Selected Proceedings of the 36thAnnual Conference on
African Linguistics, ed. Olaoba F. Arasanyin and Michael A. Pemberton,
93-98.Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Proceedings Project.
www.lingref.com, document #1411.
|
