The Finisterre–Huon languages comprise the largest family within the Trans–New Guinea languages (TNG) in the classification of Malcolm Ross. They were part of the original TNG proposal, and William A. Foley considers their TNG identity to be established. The languages share a small closed class of verbs taking pronominal object prefixes some of which are cognate (Suter 2012), strong morphological evidence that they are related.
History of classification
[edit]
Huon and Finisterre, and then the connection between them, were identified by Kenneth McElhanon (1967, 1970). When McElhanon compared notes with his colleague Clemens Voorhoeve, who was working on the languages of southern Irian Jaya, they developed the concept of Trans–New Guinea. Apart from the evidence which unites them, the Finisterre and Huon families are clearly valid language families in their own right, each consisting of several fairly-well defined branches.
Pronouns
[edit]
Ross (2005) reconstructs the pronouns as follows:
sg
du
pl
1
*na
*na-t, *ni-t
*na-n, *n-in
2
*ga
*ja-ł, *ji-ł, *gi-ł
*ja-n, *ji-n, *gi-n
3
*[y]a, *wa, *i
*ya-ł, *i-ł
*ya-n, *i-n
These are not all coherent: 3sg *ya and *i are found in Huon, for example, while 3sg *wa is found in Finisterre. In other cases, however, the multiple forms are found in both branches.
Vocabulary comparison
[edit]
The following basic vocabulary words are from McElhanon & Voorhoeve (1970)[1] and McElhanon (1967),[2] as cited in the Trans-New Guinea database.[3]
The words cited constitute translation equivalents, whether they are cognate (e.g. hɔme, samo for “nose”) or not (e.g. mic-, sot, dzɔŋɔ for “tooth”). Notice the very low number of cognate triplets, or even pairs, among these languages.
gloss
Kâte
Selepet
Kovai
head
kpitsec-
kun; kun-
buno
hair
dzâwâ-
somot; somot-
ear
hatsec-
âdâp-; ɔndɔp
ano
eye
dzâŋe-
sen; sen-
dziŋo
nose
sâke-
hâme-; hɔme
samo
tooth
mic-
sât-; sot
dzɔŋɔ
tongue
nameŋ-
nibilam-; nimbilam
biŋio
louse
imeŋ
imen
apalau
dog
kpâto
soso
goun
bird
wipe
nâi; nɔi
naŋ
blood
soc-
hep-
bone
siec-
haǥit; hahit-
yo
skin
sahac-
hâk-; hɔk
siŋlo
breast
moŋ-
nam; nam-
suyo
tree
yâc
nak
man
ŋic
lok
woman
ŋokac
apet; ibi
sky
sambâŋ
hibim
sun
dzoaŋ
dewutâ; dewutɔ
sual
moon
mosa
emesenŋe
water
opâ
to
lap
fire
kɔlɔp
puŋ
stone
kpânâ
kât; kɔt
road, path
hata
giop
atam
name
dzâne-
kut; kut-
eat
nâ-
ne; ni-
one
mocyaha
konok
two
yayahec
yâhâp
Evolution
[edit]
See also: Kâte language § Evolution, and Selepet language § Evolution
Finisterre-Huon reflexes of proto-Trans-New Guinea (pTNG) etyma are:[4]
Kâte language:
bɔruŋ ‘flame’ < *mbalaŋ ‘flame’
butoŋ ‘fingernail’ < *mb(i,u)t(i,u)C
bekɔ ‘orphan’ < *mbVŋga(-masi)
masiŋ ‘widow’ < *masi
sambɔŋ ‘sky’ < *sambV ‘cloud’
tofeʔ ‘saliva’ < *si(mb,p)atV
lo- ‘take’ < *(nd,t)a-
munduŋ ‘inner yolk of egg’ < *mundun ‘internal organs’
go ‘2sg’ < *ŋga
hɔmo- ‘die’ < *kumV-
bɔriʔ ‘glitter, flash of lightning’ < *(m,mb)elak ‘light, lightning’
^McElhanon, K.A. and Voorhoeve, C.L. The Trans-New Guinea Phylum: Explorations in deep-level genetic relationships. B-16, vi + 112 pages. Pacific Linguistics, The Australian National University, 1970. doi:10.15144/PL-B16
^Pawley, Andrew; Hammarström, Harald (2018). "The Trans New Guinea family". In Palmer, Bill (ed.). The Languages and Linguistics of the New Guinea Area: A Comprehensive Guide. The World of Linguistics. Vol. 4. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. pp. 21–196. ISBN 978-3-11-028642-7.
Bibliography
[edit]
Ross, Malcolm (2005). "Pronouns as a preliminary diagnostic for grouping Papuan languages". In Andrew Pawley; Robert Attenborough; Robin Hide; Jack Golson (eds.). Papuan pasts: cultural, linguistic and biological histories of Papuan-speaking peoples. Canberra: Pacific Linguistics. pp. 15–66. ISBN 0858835622. OCLC 67292782.
Suter, Edgar (2012). Verbs with pronominal object prefixes in Finisterre–Huon languages. In: Harald Hammarström and Wilco van den Heuvel (eds.). History, contact and classification of Papuan languages. [Special Issue 2012 of Language and Linguistics in Melanesia]. 23–58. Port Moresby: Linguistic Society of Papua New Guinea.