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.
 |
