Adelaar Willem, Muysken Pieter. The languages of the Andes

Подождите немного. Документ загружается.

404 3 The Inca Sphere

kadul

kaˇsul ‘toasted maize’

kungul

kulk´ul ‘tadpole’

lambake lambax

‘tasteless’

mind

˙z

o mund

˙z

u ‘navel’

ˇsayape ˇs

ayaϕ ‘a plant name’

ˇsirak(e) ˇsirax

‘a plant name’

ˇz

um uˇsun ‘(honey of) wild bee’

These and other examples suggest the existence of a Culli substratum in the area now

covered by Cajamarca Quechua, in particular in the district of Chetilla, where some

of the above items were recorded. A linguistic link between Cajamarca and the Culli

area is explicitly mentioned by Cieza de Le´on (1553, chapter 81) when he observes

that ‘the province of Huamachuco is similar to that of Cajamarca, and that the Indians

have the same language and dress the same way’.

195

However, in a careful analysis

of Cajamarcan place names, Torero (1989) concludes that Culli could not have been

the language of the department of Cajamarca because, apart from its southeasternmost

province of Cajabamba, the characteristic Culli toponymy is not predominant there.

Instead, he distinguishes two toponymical areas, each characterised by the frequent

occurrence of a particular ending in place names, and takes them to have represented

two hypothetical languages.

One area, deﬁned by the ending -den and its variants -don, -ten and -ton,covers

the western and central highlands of the department of Cajamarca (including part of

the newly formed province Gran Chim´uofthe department of La Libertad), with east-

ward extensions reaching the river Mara˜n´on to the north of Celend´ın and in the val-

ley of the river Crisnejas. To the south the Chicama, Chuquillanqui and San Jorge

rivers constitute a boundary separating the -den area from areas with typical Culli to-

ponymy (cf. Krzanowski and Szemi´nski 1978). Torero associates the language repre-

sented by the -den area with the pre-Inca kingdom of Guzmango, which was centred

in the province of Contumaz´a (southwest Cajamarca). Espinoza Soriano (1977: 449,

456) found three indigenous words in a report commissioned by a member of the

Guzmango royal lineage, Sebasti´an Ninaling´on, curaca (chieftain) of Xaxad´en. Ac-

cording to Torero (1989: 232), these three words (nus ‘lady’, losque ‘young girl’, mizo

‘female servant’) are attributable to the -den language. Further research is needed in

order to explain the contradiction between the absence of Culli place names in western

Cajamarca and the presence of a sizeable amount of Culli lexicon in the Quechua of that

same area.

195

‘La provincia de Guamachuco es semejable a la de Caxamalca y los indios son de una lengua

ytraje ...’

3.9 Extinct and poorly documented languages 405

The second toponymical area, deﬁned by the ending -cat(e) and its variants -cot(e),

-gat(e) and -got(e), includes the town of Cajamarca and stretches out in a triangular shape

towards the Mara˜n´on river, covering parts of the provinces of Cajamarca, Celend´ın and

San Marcos. It also includes a stretch of land in the northern provinces of Cutervo and

Chota. As Torero observes, the ending -cat and its variants are found throughout most of

northern Peru. The same holds for a few other endings occurring in the area at issue (-can,

-con, -gan, -gon, -uran). It appears that the -cat area, as deﬁned above geographically, is

a toponymical default area characterised by a low incidence of -den endings and other

recognisable toponymy (although there is a substantial cluster of Culli place names not

far from Celend´ın). Torero (1989: 236–7) ventures the idea that -cat (∼-cot)mayhave

had the meaning of ‘water’ or ‘river’. In that case, a further comparison with the Chol´on

language of the Huallaga basin would be in order. Torero notes that the place name

Salcot,which occurs at least three times in Cajamarca, is formally identical to Zalcot,a

Chol´on village meaning ‘black water’ in that language.

The Relaciones geogr´aﬁcas de Indias (Jim´enez de la Espada 1965, III: 143–6) contain

a document entitled Relaci´on de la tierra de Ja´en (Account of the Land of Ja´en). It offers

a detailed description of the complex language situation in the area surrounding the bend

of the Mara˜n´on or Upper Amazon in the northern part of the present-day departments

of Amazonas and Cajamarca. This document has been analysed in Rivet (1934) and in

Torero (1993a). It registers the existence of a particular language called the language of

Sacata. Other sources associate the people of Sacata (or Z´acata) with a well-organised

ethnic group, the Chillao, who inhabited opposite banks of the Mara˜n´on valley near

Cujillo (province of Cutervo) and Yam´on (province of Utcubamba, Amazonas). Only

three Sacata words are mentioned in the Relaci´on: unga ‘water’, umague ‘maize’ and

chichache ‘ﬁre’. On this basis Rivet proposed a relationship with the Candoshi languages,

whereas Torero opts for an Arawakan connection. The factual basis is insufﬁcient for

either conclusion.

The bottom of the Mara˜n´on valley between the mouths of its tributaries Chamaya

and Utcubamba, and the lower reaches of the valleys of these two rivers (province of

Bagua, Amazonas; province of Cutervo, Cajamarca) were inhabited by an ethnic group

called Bagua (Torero) or Patag´on de Bagua (Rivet). Three words of this language are

mentioned: tuna ‘water’, lancho ‘maize’ and nacx´e ‘come here’. Although tuna coincides

with the word for ‘water’ in many Cariban languages, the evidence is not sufﬁcient to

allow any reliable classiﬁcation.

The area of Old Ja´en, Perico and Tomependa (province of Bagua, Amazonas; province

of Ja´en, Cajamarca) on the left bank of the Mara˜n´on near its conﬂuence with the

Chinchipe was inhabited by a population called the Patag´on (or Patag´on de Perico

in Rivet’s terminology). The four words that have been recorded, tun´a ‘water’, an´as

‘maize’, viue ‘ﬁrewood’ and coar´a ‘sheep’ (here to be interpreted as ‘sloth’), indicate

406 3 The Inca Sphere

a northern Cariban afﬁnity, for instance, with Carijona or with one of the languages of

the Roraima region (Torero 1993: 451).

Another group, the Tabancale, inhabited the village of Aconipa in an elevated area

near the upper reaches of the Chinchipe river, approximately in the border area of Ecuador

(province of Zamora-Chinchipe) and Peru (province of San Ignacio, Cajamarca). Five

words of their language have been recorded: yema ‘water’, moa ‘maize’, oyme ‘ﬁrewood’,

lalaque ‘ﬁre’ and tie ‘house’. Their language must remain unclassiﬁed because these

words do not exhibit any signiﬁcant afﬁnity with other known languages.

Still another unclassiﬁed language was spoken in the villages of Copall´en (today

Copall´ın), Llanque and Las Lomas del Viento. They were situated on a plateau dominat-

ing the Utcubamba river east of Bagua (provinces of Bagua and Utcubamba, Amazonas).

Of this language of Copall´en the following words have been recorded: quiet ‘water’,

chumac ‘maize’, olaman ‘ﬁrewood’ and ismare ‘house’. Apart from a similarity between

its word for ‘water’ and the element -cat treated above, nothing can be said about the

genetic afﬁnities of this language.

The Chirino constituted one of the principal ethnic groups in the area, occupying

parts of the valley of the Chinchipe river and a vast territory extending east of it. Their

language has been identiﬁed as a member of the Candoshi family (Rivet 1934, Torero

1993a). The four words of this language that were recorded in the Relaci´on de la tierra

de Ja´en are yungo ‘water’, yugato ‘maize’, xum´as ‘ﬁrewood’ and paxquiro ‘grass’. For

the Jivaroan-speaking Xoroca see section 2.9.1. All the languages found in the region of

Bagua and Ja´en in the sixteenth century disappeared at an early stage. The region north

of the Mara˜n´on is now partly occupied by Aguaruna and other Jivaroan peoples.

The pre-Inca native peoples of the highlands of the department of Amazonas (capital

Chachapoyas), situated east of the Mara˜n´on river, were known as the Chachapoya.

Impressive ruined cities such as Cu´elap and Gran Vilaya are witnesses of important

past cultural developments in this remote area. After being conquered by the Incas, a

large portion of the Chachapoya were taken away to other areas of the Inca empire, for

instance, to the surroundings of Cuzco and Quito, whereas Quechua-speaking mitimaes

were sent to the Chachapoyas region. The original language of the region is sometimes

referred to as Chacha.Itisnearly unknown, although some of its most conspicuous

characteristics could be recovered from local place names and family names.

Zevallos Qui˜nones (1966) collected several hundred Chachapoya family names from

colonial documents. Taylor (1990a) has compared these names with present-day family

names recorded by him in the Chachapoyas region. Several of the colonial names are still

in use. As a result of transmigration, Chachapoya family names were also found in other

parts of the former Inca empire, for instance, in Quito, where one Juan Yoplachacha

was found among the Chachapoya mitimaes (Salomon 1986: 160); cf. the Chachapoya

family name Yoplac.Taylor observes that many Chachapoya names are monosyllabic

3.9 Extinct and poorly documented languages 407

(Cam, Hob, Oc∼Occ, Sup, Yull). Others are formed by the repetition of a monosyllabic

element (Pispis, Solsol), or consist of a combination of elements (Detquis´an, Subsolsol,

Visalot). Voiced stops could occur word-initially (Det, Buelot, Gaslac), suggesting that

there was an opposition between voiced and voiceless stops in that environment. Initial

consonants often appear to be palatalised or velarised (for instance, in Guiop [g

op] and

in the place name Cu´emal [k

´emal]), although an interpretation in terms of rising diph-

thongs is also possible. The only frequent non-rising diphthong was uy (e.g. Puyqu´ın).

The language seems to have distinguished at least ﬁve vowels (a, e, i, o, u). Taylor

reports that the pronunciation of some Chachapoya family names was modiﬁed due to

the radical phonetic changes that affected the local Quechua that eventually replaced

the Chachapoya language (and is now itself nearing extinction); for instance, the name

Surueque or Zuruec became s´urix in Quechua. Only in a very few cases could the mean-

ing of a name or of one of its constituents be traced. Taylor reports that the name Oc(c)

[ox] may have meant ‘puma’ or ‘bear’ according to an oral tradition of the village of La

Jalca.

Frequent endings in place names are -huala, -lap(e) and -mal (e.g. Shucahuala,

Cu´elap, Yulmal). Taylor tentatively interprets these elements as ‘mountain’, ‘fortress’

and ‘plain’ on the basis of the type of location they usually refer to. An additional end-

ing -lon is mentioned by Torero (1989). Taylor, furthermore, notes the occurrence of the

endings -gach(e), -gat(e) and -gote (e.g. Sh´ıngache, T´ongate), and suggests that these

could mean ‘river’, ‘water’. Note the striking parallelism with Hibito kaˇci and Chol´on

kot ‘water’, ‘river’ (cf. section 4.11.1), and remember the discussion of the hypothetical

-cat language of Cajamarca.

The extension of the Chachapoya language area is a matter that remains to be in-

vestigated. In the department of Amazonas it may have included the provinces of

Bongar´a, Chachapoyas, Luya, Rodr´ıguez de Mendoza and part of Utcubamba. In addi-

tion, the language may well have been used in parts of Cajamarca, in the area of Bol´ıvar

(ex-Cajamarquilla) in the department of La Libertad, and in the northwest and west of

the department of San Mart´ın (where the ruins of Gran Pajat´en, located in a depopu-

lated forest area, may have had connections with the ancient Chachapoya culture). The

possibility of connections with Hibito–Chol´on, the language of Copall´en and the -cat

language would be worth investigating if the data were not so scarce.

3.9.3 Northwestern Argentina

In the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries the Andean region of northwestern Argentina

was the home of a large ethnic group, the Diaguita, subdivided into numerous subtribes

(Calchaqu´ı, Capay´an, Hualf´ın, Paccioca, Pular, Quilme). They occupied an extensive

area, including the provinces of Catamarca and La Rioja and the Andean parts of the

provinces of Salta and San Juan. They also inhabited parts of the pre-Andean provinces of

408 3 The Inca Sphere

Santiago del Estero and Tucum´an, which they shared with the Tonocot´e (cf. section 3.8).

One of their most famous strongholds were the Calchaqu´ıvalleys (Valles Calchaqu´ıes),

which extend from north to south in the provinces of Salta, Tucum´an and Catamarca.

In the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries the name Diaguita was often used in a nar-

rower sense, referring to the inhabitants of Catamarca and La Rioja but excluding the

inhabitants of the Calchaqu´ıvalleys.

In a letter dated 1594 the Jesuit missionary Alonso de Barzana gives a detailed de-

scription of the ethnic situation in northwestern Argentina and of the languages that

were spoken there (Jim´enez de la Espada 1965, II: 78–86). He reports that the language

of the Diaguita was called Caca,aname subsequently modiﬁed to Kak´an. Barzana was

the author of a grammar of the Kak´an language, which has not survived. Between 1630

and 1660, as a reaction to Spanish exploitation, the Diaguita united in a series of rebel-

lions, headed in their ﬁnal phase by an Andalucian adventurer Pedro Boh´orquez, who

had assumed the title of ‘Inca’ (Piossek Prebisch 1976; Isabel Hern´andez 1992). After

their defeat most of the Diaguita were deported to other areas. The Calchaqu´ıvalleys

were entirely depopulated. The Quilme tribe, which had fought particularly bravely, was

relocated in what is now the town of Quilmes near Buenos Aires. Others were distributed

as servants to Spanish colonists. Mainly as a result of these events, the Kak´an language

soon became extinct.

Although almost nothing is known of the Kak´an language, personal names and to-

ponymy are well represented. For the names of chiefs participating in the Boh´orquez

rebellion see Piossek Prebisch (1976: 109) or Isabel Hern´andez (1992: 160). Diaguita

place names are found along the Andes in an area extending approximately from Jujuy

to Mendoza; for an inventory see Mart´ın (1964). Lozano (1874–5) provides an explana-

tion for some elements of frequent occurrence, such as the ending -ahaho∼ -ahao∼ -ao

meaning ‘village’ or ‘town’, which usually follows the name of an ethnic subgroup or a

chief (e.g. Anguinahao, Colalao, Luracatao). A further example of this ending is found

in the place name Tuc(u)manaha(h)o, named after a chief who also gave his name to

the town and province of Tucum´an (Nardi 1979: 11). Another ending meaning ‘village’

or ‘town’ is -gasta (e.g. in Antofagasta,

196

Payogasta, Tinogasta). It is one of the most

characteristic endings throughout the Argentinian northwest, but it has been attributed

to Tonocot´ebyLozano. Whereas Mart´ın assigns the -gasta ending to southern Diaguita,

Nardi (1979: 7) keeps open the possibility that it may indeed have been a borrowed

element, because its area of distribution is wider than that of the Kak´an language alone.

Serrano (1936) remarks that the endings -ao/-ahaho and -gasta often occur attached to

196

The Chilean town of Antofagasta,which dates from the middle of the nineteenth century, was

presumably named after the old mining settlement Antofagasta de la Sierra, situated in the

highlands (puna)ofthe province of Catamarca (Argentina).

3.9 Extinct and poorly documented languages 409

the same root (e.g. Amanao/Amangasta, Tucumanao/Tucumagasta), suggesting that the

endings could have been switched at a certain point. A genuine Kak´an ending is -vil

(e.g. in Quimivil, Yocavil), which appears to be related with notions like ‘water’.

Nardi (1979) provides the most comprehensive overview of what we know about

Kak´an. He observes that most of the colonial authors who had access to this lan-

guage emphasise its guttural and ‘strangely difﬁcult’ character. Kak´an probably had

postvelar fricatives, both voiced and voiceless. This can be deduced from the fact that

the Quechua dialect of Santiago del Estero has some vocabulary derived from a non-

Quechuan substratum (probably Diaguita) in which these sounds occur (e.g. wax

alu ‘a

type of ant’, oˇcoʁ o ‘an aquatic bird’). Many Diaguita names contain f (as in the place

names Famatina and Cafayate; and in Ficpam, the name of a chief); palatal consonants

(ˇc, ˇs, l

, n

) are particularly frequent. The presence of r and a contrast between voiced

and voiceless stops are both uncertain. The materials included in Nardi’s article show a

low incidence of mid vowels, suggesting that the language may have had a three-vowel

system like Aymara and Quechua. By combining all possible information Nardi man-

aged to identify a few lexical items, such as ango/anco ‘water’, huilla ‘hare’, ismi ‘bird’,

mampa ‘irrigation canal’, talca ‘guanaco’, tancol ‘arrow’ and zupca ‘place of sacriﬁce’

(mentioned in Lozano 1754–55, II: 295). He, furthermore, ventures the opinion that in

Kak´an adjectives may have followed the noun they modify, as in Angualasto, the name

of a river which today is called R´ıo Blanco (hypothetically, ango walasto ‘white water’).

There is evidence that the Kak´an language was subdivided into dialects. The Capay´an

variety of the La Rioja area has been mentioned as a separate language for which

interpreters were needed (Cabrera 1917; Canals Frau 1946). Another dialect name,

Yacampis,may have referred to the dialect of the Diaguita heartland in Catamarca

or to that of the Calchaqu´ıvalleys. Nardi (1979) holds the view that the differences

between these varieties were only dialectal, although he admits the possibility of a

division between a northern dialect including the Calchaqu´ıvalleys and a southern

dialect comprising most of Catamarca and La Rioja.

According to tradition, the Diaguita domain extended into northern Chile covering the

actual area of Copiap´o, Vallenar and La Serena in the regions of Atacama and Coquimbo.

Atowninthe valley of Elqui still bears the name of Diaguita. However, the ﬁrst Spanish

visitors to the area found a great linguistic variety on their journey southward through

northern Chile. Ger´onimo de Bibar (1558), the chronicler of Pedro de Valdivia’s Chilean

expedition, reports that the inhabitants of the valleys of Copiap´o and Huasco (Atacama

region) spoke closely related languages, but that the Indians of Coquimbo and Limar´ı

(Coquimbo region) each had their own languages. The Chilean Diaguita have left very

few traces, even in the toponymy.

In the extreme northwest of Argentina, in the western parts of the provinces of

Jujuy and Salta, a presence of the Atacame˜no language and culture is attested. Local

410 3 The Inca Sphere

groups are known as Apatama, Casabindo, Churumata and Cochinoca. The Quebrada

de Humahuaca,avalley which crosses the heart of Jujuy province from north to south,

is believed to have had its own language (Loukotka 1968), which is usually referred to

as Humahuaca (or Omaguaca). There is hardly any linguistic information on this group,

which apparently was subdivided into several smaller units called Fiscara, Jujuy, Ocloya,

Osa, Purmamarca and Tiliar (Isabel Hern´andez 1992: 127). The name of Viltipoco, the

ruler of Tilcara, who resisted the Spaniards in the sixteenth century, and the local sur-

name Vilte suggest a connection with the Atacame˜no language. In Atacame˜no bilti means

‘falcon’.

The languages of the eastern slopes

As the alter ego of Mario Vargas Llosa strolls through Florence, trying to put all matters

Peruvian out of his mind in order to read Machiavelli and Dante, he stumbles onto

an exhibit of dusty photographs of the Machiguenga. In El hablador (The Speaker;

1987), documentary and novel, this nation plays a central role, one of the countless

groups of Indians struggling in small bands on the eastern foothills of the Andes and on

the Amazonian plains, in order to maintain their cultural and linguistic integrity. This

chapter will try to give a necessarily brief account of the very diverse languages of these

groups.

Since it is impossible to say precisely where the slopes and foothills end and where

the plains begin, we artiﬁcially delimit the area discussed in this chapter as the republics

of Ecuador, Peru and Bolivia east of the Andes. The Chaco area of southeastern Bolivia

extends into western Paraguay and into northwestern Argentina, and these are included

as well. The Chaco languages are not covered by Dixon and Aikhenvald (1999). For

these reasons, we include some material on all of the Chaco languages, even though

they merit a more extensive separate treatment. Strictly speaking, this means that too

many languages are included: languages of the Amazonian plains cannot properly be

called Andean. On the other hand, it turns out that Quechua inﬂuence, one of the topics

we will be concerned with in this chapter, extends far beyond the foothills. Another not

altogether felicitous result of our delimitation is that the Colombian Amazonian plain,

which forms a natural continuation of that of Ecuador and Peru, is not discussed here (it

was dealt with in chapter 2).

A. C. Taylor (1999: 198–9) describes some of the relations that existed between

monta˜na and sierra cultures. Most of these were broken as a result of the colonisation

process, and highland and lowland groups grew apart. In pre-Columbian times,

Cochabamba (in what is now Bolivia) and Hu´anuco (in what is now Peru) served as

trading centres for lowland groups. In northern Bolivia the Callahuaya chiefdoms acted

as intermediaries between Quechua and Aymara cazicazgos and lowland Mojo, Tacana,

and lesser Arawak groups. In Peru, the Campa of the Ucayali river established links with

interﬂuvial Panoans and with the Piro on the Urubamba. The Incas had an open frontier,

PERU

COLOMBIA

TETETÉ (†)

SIONA

COFÁN

HUAO

TEKIRAKA(†)

ANDOA(†)

ARABELA

BORA

OCAINA

TICUNA

OREJÓN

HUITOTO

MURUI

RESÍGARO

YAG UA

OMAGUA(†)

COCAMA

MAYO

MAYORUNA

QUECHUA IQUITO

CAHUARANO

YAMEO(†)

URARINA

COCAMA

CAPANAHUA

CHAMICURO

TAUSHIRO

MAYNA(†)

CHAYAHUITA

JEBERO

MUNICHE

PIRO

SENSI(†)

PÁNOBO(†)

QUECHUA

HIBITO(†)

CHOLÓN(†)

CANDOSHI

HUAMBISA

ZÁPARO

QUECHUA

ECUADOR

TSAFIKI

SHIPIBO

Iquitos

Moyobamba

Chachapoyas

Cajamarca

Cuenca

Quito

Guayaquil

Piura

QUECHUA

CHA

′

PALAACHI

HUITOTO

MUINANE

Map 7 Eastern lowland languages: Ecuador and northern P

eru

4 Languages of the eastern slopes 413

PERU

SHIPIBO

Pucallpa

ISCONAHUA

YANESHA

′

ASHÁNINCA

AMAHUACA

CULINA

MARINAHUA

SHARANAHUA

CASHINAHUA

YAMINAHUA

CAMPA

CAQUINTE

PIRO

NAHUA

IÑAPARI

AMAHUACA

BRAZIL

ESE'EJJA

Puerto

Maldonado

HARAKMBUT

MASHCO-

PIRO

KUGAPACORI

MACHIGUENGA

Cuzco

Ayacucho

QUECHUA

Lake

Titicaca

CHILE

Lima

ASHÁNINCA

PIRO

Map 8 Eastern lowland languages: southern Peru

stimulating links of dependency of local chieftains with Cuzco, but leaving local links

intact. As a result of the colonisation process, all these links were weakened considerably

or disappeared altogether.

The population of the lowlands is sparse, and far from homogeneous sociologically.

Taylor (1999: 194–5) divides the current population into racionales (‘rational people’,

mestizos or highland Indians who have abandoned their original ethnic identity), nativos

‘natives’ or mansos ‘tame people’ (Amerindian groups living in accessible settlements

but maintaining their ethnic identity), and aucas ‘wild, inimical people’ (groups who

maintain a distance from the mestizo world).