Adelaar Willem, Muysken Pieter. The languages of the Andes

Подождите немного. Документ загружается.

604 7 The Spanish presence

Paciﬁc coast in northern Ecuador. Simson (1886) in a travel account and Gnerre (1975)

have provided some data on varieties of this pidgin. Sample sentences are:

(31) Ese canoa andando Consacunti cuando ser´a llegando ese

Tonantins tiene?

that canoe going (to) Consacunti when will.be arriving that Tonantins

has.got

(roughly) ‘This canoe going along to the Consacunti when will it be

reaching the Tonantins?’

(32) Ese Consacunti, Carapan´a llegando, m´as.lejos ser´a tiene ese

Carapan´a, Tonantins llegando?

that Consacunti Carapan´aarriving farther will.be has.got that Carapan´a

Tonantins arriving

(roughly) ‘Arriving in Consacunti and Carapan´a, will it be further from

Carapan´atoTonantins?’

(33) Tu yo no sabiendo le ˜na cortando.

yours not knowing wood cutting

‘You do not know how to cut wood.’

Features that can be identiﬁed on the basis of Gnerre’s and Simson’s pidgin data are that

the verb is in the gerundive form and a verb form est´a meaning ‘to be, to be characterised

by’. In Simson’s data it is not the verb estar that is overgeneralised in its use, but rather

the future of the verb ser, i.e. ser´a lit. ‘he will be’. There is SOV word order, with the

main sentence verb following the subordinate sentence verb (consistent with SOV basic

order). Prepositions tend to be absent. We ﬁnd the generalised use of Spanish tiene ‘has

got’, probably as an emphatic marker. The Spanish demonstrative pronoun ese ‘that’

is used as deﬁnite marker. While in Gnerre’s data the second-person pronoun is vos

‘(informal) you’, Simson has tuyo ‘(intimate) yours’.

7.4 African inﬂuences

From the very beginning, the Spanish conquistadores brought African slaves with them

to the Andes. While the black population did not become the dominant one, as in the

Caribbean, Africans were forcibly settled in most Andean countries. This includes not

only Venezuela and Colombia, where their presence and inﬂuence is clearest, but also

the coastal regions of Peru and Ecuador, and, for instance, the silver mines of Potos´ıin

Bolivia, at an altitude of over 4,000 metres.

While only one clearly distinct new language emerged out of African slavery in the

area we are concerned with, Palenquero, other varieties of Spanish in different regions

clearly display African traits. Romero (1988) shows that this inﬂuence on the Peruvian

Spanish lexicon has been quite extensive.

7.5 Language planning and bilingual education 605

Palenquero is spoken in one village near Cartagena in northern Colombia, San Basilio

del Palenque (Friedemann and Pati˜no 1983; Megenney 1986). It descends from the

language spoken by the slaves who built the fortiﬁcations of Cartagena during the late

sixteenth and early seventeenth centuries, and a group of whom escaped in 1603. Isolation

has helped maintain the language, but now all remaining speakers are bilingual. Indeed,

many utterances contain Spanish elements (given in capitals in the fragment presented

here; Bickerton and Escalante 1970):

(34) no. ma´ılo mi kel´enu.

EL NO ME kel´emias´ına. w´eno ki i par´ıun

mon´a

TO LOS A ...anda, panda ga´ına, ke ta kum´etoal´o

no. husband me want not. he not me want me like that. good that I bear a

child all they...goon,scare hen, that is eat all rice

‘No. My husband does not want it. He does not like me like that. It is

good that I bear a child every year....Goon,chase the hen away, it

eats all the rice.’

It is clear that the basic vocabulary derives from Spanish, but there is also an important

Bantu component (Bickerton and Escalante 1970).

In the coastal regions of southern Colombia and northern Ecuador, Nari˜no and Es-

meraldas, respectively, non-standard Afro-American varieties of Spanish, are spoken.

Lipski (1987) considers these as non-creoles; they are only different from other varieties

of local Spanish in non-core lexicon and pronunciation, and even in the latter have many

features of coastal (Andalucian) Spanish in general. However, the variety spoken by

descendants of slaves of highland Jesuit plantations in the Chota valley, Imbabura and

Carchi provinces in northern Ecuador, does exhibit a few remnants which point to a cre-

ole or partly creolised antecessor. First, -s is often deleted word-ﬁnally, but not in other

contexts, while in coastal Spanish it is frequently aspirated or deleted in all contexts.

At the same time, the non-Afro-American surrounding varieties of highland Spanish

exhibit no s-deletion to speak of. Furthermore, there are cases of improper agreement

both in the noun phrase and in the verb phrase. These are characteristic of Quechua–

Spanish bilinguals, as we have seen, but not of monolinguals such as the chote˜nos.From

all this, Lipski (1987) concludes that we must distinguish between traits which Afro-

American Spanish may simply have inherited from coastal Spanish in general, and cases

where there is evidence for antecedent creole varieties, the case in point being the Chota

valley.

7.5 Language planning and policy with respect to the Amerindian

languages and to bilingual education

The various Andean countries differ in the legal status of the native languages, both due

to the ethnic constitution of the different nations and to their political systems and degree

of ethnic mobilisation. Nonetheless, it should be clear that everywhere the Amerindian

606 7 The Spanish presence

languages are oppressed, to use Alb´o’s term (1977). In spite of the secondary role that

some Amerindian language may play, the dominant role is reserved for Spanish (see

L´opez and Jung 1998 for a useful overview).

It should not be forgotten, and this is stressed again by Jung (1991), that a so-called

‘minority language problem’ is really a problem of the majority, and of the degree to

which this majority is willing to accommodate and respect other languages. Bilingualism

is all too often a one-sided affair, with speakers of a dominated language learning the

dominant one, and not the other way around.

When we talk about bilingual education for native groups in the Andes, two distinc-

tions are quite important. (a) Projects are experimental in status, and cease when the

evaluation has been completed or when the funding has dried up. Programmes are more

permanent, and reﬂect the commitment of educational planning authorities towards a

given practice. (b) In transitional models the non-dominant language has an intermediate

role, primarily to help the child adjust to the dominant ‘national’ culture and language,

which are diffused through the schools. Often use of the Amerindian language will be

limited to a few subjects in the ﬁrst three years or so. In maintenance models the educa-

tional programme is geared towards the stimulation of the non-dominant language and

culture. Use of the Amerindian language will be much more extensive and continues

through the years of schooling.

This requires both more widespread literacy in the Amerindian languages and the

development of these languages as written languages (L´opez and Jung 1987, 1998).

Hornberger (1988, 1989) discusses the complex role of education, even if conducted in

the native language, in Amerindian communities.

We will return to some general issues after surveying the situation in the different

Andean countries.

Venezuela.InVenezuela roughly 1 per cent of the population speaks an Amerindian

language. Spanish is the only ofﬁcial language, but since 1979 there is legislation that

supports bilingual education programmes (von Gleich 1989a: 357–63; Toledo 1989). The

ofﬁcial policy is towards transitional programmes, stressing linkage to la vida nacional

‘the life of the nation’, but there are initiatives, particularly in the Upper Amazon basin

(Eguillor 1989; Jim´enez Tur´on 1989), for maintenance programmes, with the support

of church groups and tribal organisations (Mosonyi 1972, 1987).

Colombia.AsinVenezuela, Spanish is the only ofﬁcial language of Colombia, where

about 2 per cent speaks an Amerindian language (von Gleich 1989a: 215–29).

Legislation dating from 1978 outlines a type of bilingual education geared towards

language maintenance, with strong community input. There are two centres for the

training of Indian teachers. Under the general denominator of etnoeducaci´on there are a

number of programmes, run by Amerindian organisations, in part in collaboration with

church groups. The constitution of 1991 has provided new rights for indigenous groups.

7.5 Language planning and bilingual education 607

Twoorganisations have been quite active in promoting the further study and documen-

tation of the Colombian Amerindian languages: the Summer Institute of Linguistics and

the CCELA (Centro Colombiano de Estudios de Lenguas Abor´ıgenes) at the Universidad

de los Andes (cf. chapter 2).

Ecuador.InEcuador perhaps as many as a quarter of the population may consider

itself to be Indian, but not all speak an Amerindian language. While Spanish is the ofﬁcial

language, the constitution recognises Quechua and the other Amerindian languages as

part of the culture of the nation. A law dating from 1981 formally acknowledges the need

for bilingual intercultural education in predominantly Indian areas, and it is safe to say

that in Ecuador bilingual education is more advanced than in the other Andean countries.

Educational programmes are functioning in most Indian areas in the country, and there are

four teacher training colleges specialising in bilingual education: two in the lowlands, and

two in the highlands. There is a standardised variety termed quichua uniﬁcado ‘uniﬁed

Quechua’. King (2000) suggests that tensions emerge between this uniﬁed variety and

local varieties, perceived as more authentic. These tensions are probably inherent in

any standardisation effort, but are of particular importance in the fragile situation of the

standardisation of an Amerindian language variety. An important role in the propagation

of a uniﬁed Quechua was played by radio stations such as La Voz de los Andes (The

Voice of the Andes).

Peru.InPeru the ofﬁcial language is Spanish, while Quechua and Aymara can also be

used ofﬁcially, and the other native languages form part of the cultural heritage of the

nation as well, according to article 83 of the constitution (L´opez 1990). Discrimination

on the basis of language is speciﬁcally prohibited, and each person has the legal right

to use her or his own language in dealings with the judiciary system. Thus, for a while,

Peru accorded the highest legal status to the Amerindian languages of all of South

America (von Gleich 1989a: 318–55; see Mannheim 1984 for a historical account of the

development of language policies in Peru). Nonetheless, daily life is different for most

of the almost four million speakers of Amerindian languages in Peru. In fact, languages

such as Quechua are rarely used ofﬁcially, though it is spoken widely, even in migrant

neighbourhoods in urban centres. Myers (1973) is an interesting early study of the use

of Quechua in the barriadas (popular neighbourhoods) of Lima and her results have

been conﬁrmed in later research. Gugenberger (1995) illustrates the mixed feelings that

bilingual migrants to the city of Arequipa have about their native language and Spanish.

Vo n Gleich (1989b) reports on a study in which attitudes towards Quechua and Spanish

in the Ayacucho area are studied, conjointly with W. W¨olck, with ten-year intervals from

1968 onward.

In 1984 legislation was passed which made bilingual education possible, leading to

the ‘progressive Hispanicisation’ of the Indian children. There are three centres for the

training of bilingual teachers: in Iquitos, supported by CAAAP (Centro Amaz´onico de

608 7 The Spanish presence

Antropolog´ıa y Aplicaci´on Pract´ıca); Puno, founded by the German-funded Proyecto

Experimental de Educaci´on Biling¨ue; and Yarinacocha, founded by the Summer In-

stitute of Linguistics. A number of bilingual education projects have been set up. In

Ayacucho there have been Quechua–Spanish activities, with some interruptions, since

1964, directed primarily at the early grades of schooling. In 1983 a project started on

the R´ıo Tambo, directed at the Ash´aninca. Finally, in Puno a project ran between 1977

and 1988 which was one of the largest in the Andes, in terms of staff, publications, etc.

(cf. section 3.2.12). It has been amply documented; an external evaluation of the project

is presented in Hornberger (1988, 1989).

Bolivia.Even though almost half of the population usually speaks a different lan-

guage in Bolivia (Alb´o 1980), the only ofﬁcial language is Spanish (von Gleich 1989a:

204–14). An impression of the complex Quechua–Spanish bilingual setting in the

Cochabamba area is given in Alb´o (1968, 1974), and Alb´o (1995) provides an ex-

haustive survey, based on census-data, of the multilingual situation in the early 1990s.

Present-day legislation only mentions Amerindian languages with respect to (adult) al-

phabetisation and basic education programmes. Nonetheless, educational planning does

include bilingual programmes as one of its objectives. There are three centres for the

training of bilingual teachers, one focusing on Aymara, one on Quechua and one on

Guaran´ı.

Chile. There are large groups of speakers of Amerindian languages, particularly Ma-

puche, but Spanish is the only ofﬁcial language in Chile. Such legislation as there is

speciﬁcally referring to native groups focuses on integration in national society. There

are no speciﬁc training programmes for bilingual teachers. In the rural education pro-

gramme for the Mapuche area the language itself is not taught (von Gleich, 1989a:

230–4).

Argentina.Argentina has a small but sizeable minority (over 300,000) of speakers

of Amerindian languages. Spanish is the ofﬁcial language. There is legislation that

supports a generally transitional model of bilingual education, but there are no training

programmes for bilingual teachers (von Gleich, 1989a: 198–202). Messineo (1989)

describes a programme training ‘auxiliary’ Toba teachers, in order to set up bilingual

schools.

7.6 Andean languages in the modern world

Nelly Ramos Pizarro (1989: 40) writes in an article on the bilingual competence of

Mapuche secondary school students: ‘In what will Mapudungun be useful for a girl

that will develop her whole life in a huinca (white) context?’ This is the problem in a

nutshell facing bilingual education in the Andes. Schools cannot be thought of as islands

in a society otherwise hostile to native languages and cultural values, and neither can

educational reform replace social and cultural reform.

7.6 Andean languages in the modern world 609

In a number of articles in the journal Pueblos Ind´ıgenas y Educaci´on mathematics

classes in native languages are discussed in great detail. How do we adapt the numerical

systems of the native languages to the requirements of modern mathematics teaching?

How do we develop a new meta-vocabulary in these languages? Some authors struggle

on with the set-theoretical mathematics already abandoned in the western school systems

from which it was imported into the Andes in the 1970s. Ingenious though the solutions

presented are, the question is how the mathematical knowledge inculcated in Shuar or

Aymara will serve an adolescent negotiating in the local Sunday feria (market). A related

issue is how the reading knowledge in the Amerindian languages will be put to use in

primarily oral societies.

An ever larger group of Indian children grows up learning poor Spanish at home,

rather than the Amerindian languages. For this group a transitional model does not

make much sense, since their primary language is the nationally dominant one. Thus

we need to think of different models, perhaps maintenance or recovery models, when

we think of bilingual intercultural education. Some such models have been sketched for

North America, e.g. in Craig (1991) and Watahomigie and Yamamoto (1992).

Talking about Andean languages in the modern world runs the risk of making the

error sketched in the beginning of this book, when we discussed the train image from

L´evi-Strauss’s Race et histoire.Ofcourse, the Andean languages are as much in history

and part of history as the European languages. Chiquito was used by the Bolivian army

as a secret code in the Chaco War between Bolivia and Paraguay. Similarly, Aymara is

being promoted in La Paz as an ideal computer language, due to its highly regular and

transparent agglutinative morphology, by Ivan Guti´errez.

Still, there can be no doubt that for many Andean languages, to be part of the modern

world simply means not to be there at all. We have listed enough cases of linguistic

decay and threatened ethnic and physical survival in this book to make the grim picture

sketched in Michael Krauss (1992) applicable to South America as well: about 90 per

cent of the languages spoken now may disappear in the next century, and indeed many of

the languages are disappearing at an alarming rate. However, there are some cases where

Amerindian communities have managed to regain sufﬁcient control of their environment

and local autonomy to ensure that their language has at least a chance of surviving.

Appendix

Inventory of languages and language

families of the Andean region

The following list contains an overview of the languages and language families rep-

resented in the Andean region (including the Paraguayan languages and some other

languages not systematically treated in this book). For some languages it also includes

alternative names and names used by ethnolinguistic groups for referring to themselves.

Approximative speaker numbers (s.) are given for languages still in use, but it should

be remarked that many sources do not make a speciﬁc distinction between the number

of speakers of a language and the number of members of an ethnic group. For instance,

the Colombian statistics usually refer to the totality of ethnic communities and may be

too high when used as an indication of language retention. By contrast, Peruvian ﬁgures

may well be too low because they are based on the results of a census involving ques-

tions on language use, of which the answer depends on the willingness of individuals

to supply the requested information. Most importantly, both the estimates of speaker

numbers and of ethnic group membership may differ widely according to the sources. In

this overview, minimum and maximum estimates (separated by a hyphen) are given in

cases of contradiction. For very speciﬁc high estimates, round ﬁgures may be given

instead of the original numbers.

Sources that have been consulted for the statistical information are, for Argentina,

Censabella (1999); for Colombia, Arango and S´anchez (1998), in an extract kindly

provided by Jon Landaburu, and the website Etnias de Colombia (http://www.

indigenascolombia.org); for Ecuador, Juncosa (2000); for Paraguay, Meli´a (1997); for

Peru, Brack and Y´a˜nez (1997), Pozzi-Escot (1998) and Chirinos Rivera (2001); for

Venezuela, Gonz´alez

N´a˜nez (2000) and Mosonyi and Mosonyi (2000). For Bolivia,

Ecuador and Peru, we have furthermore used the online information collected by Mily

Crevels for the UNESCO Red Book of Endangered Languages (http://www.tooyoo.l.

u-tokyo.ac-jp/Redbook/SAmerica). An online source for Chile was the website Lenguas

y Culturas de Chile (http://rehue.csociales.uchile.cl). More speciﬁc sources, such as

the online information of the Cabeceras Aid Project (http://www.onr.com/cabeceras),

administrated by Christine Beier and Lev Michael, have been consulted for particular

languages. (Online sources updated for May 2003.)

610

Inventory of Andean languages and language families 611

Aguano: unclassiﬁed. Peru (Loreto); extinct.

Andaqu´ı or Aguanunga: isolate. Colombia (Caquet´a, Huila); reportedly extinct; possibly

related to P´aez.

Andoque: isolate. Colombia (Amazonas): 518 s.

Araucanian: language family, two languages.

Huilliche: Chile (Los Lagos); a few thousand speakers.

Mapuche or Mapudungun:Argentina (Buenos Aires, Chubut, La Pampa, Neuqu´en,

R´ıo Negro), c. 40,000 s.; Chile (Araucan´ıa, Biob´ıo, Los Lagos), speaker estimates

range from 200,000 to 500,000 s.

Araw´a: language family, one language in Per´u; more in Brazil.

Culina:Peru (Ucayali): 250–400 s.; more in Brazil.

Arawakan: language family.

Achagua: Colombia (Meta): 280 s.; extinct in Venezuela.

Amuesha or Yanesha



:Peru(Hu´anuco, Jun´ın, Pasco): 1,750–7,000 s.

Ash´aninca (including Ash´eninca and Gran Pajonal Campa): Peru (Ayacucho, Cuzco,

Jun´ın, Pasco, Ucayali): 30,150–52,000 s.; more in Brazil.

Baniva del Guain´ıa: Colombia (Guain´ıa): a few; Venezuela (Amazonas): 1,130 s.

Bar´e:Venezuela (Amazonas): a few; more in Brazil (probably extinct).

Baure: Bolivia (Beni): 13 s. (in ethnic group of 630).

Cabiyar´ı: Colombia (Vaup´es): 277 s.

Campa Caquinte or Poyenisati:Peru (Cuzco, Jun´ın): 230–300 s.

Campa Nomatsiguenga:Peru (Jun´ın): 4,000–5,530 s.

Chamicuro:Peru (Loreto): 2 s. (in ethnic group of 126).

Curripaco (includes Baniva del Isana): Colombia (Guain´ıa): 7,066 s.; Venezuela

(Amazonas): 2,760–4,000 s.; more in Brazil.

Guajiro or Wayuunaiki: Colombia (Guajira): 144,000 s.; Venezuela (Zulia): 180,000 s.

(cf. Alvarez 1994).

I˜napari:Peru (Madre de Dios): 4 s.

Kugapakori or Pucapacuri or Nanti:Peru (Cuzco, Madre de Dios): 250 s., possibly

more uncontacted (information Cabeceras Aid Project).

Machiguenga:Peru (Cuzco, Madre de Dios): 5,910–8,680 s.

Machineri: Bolivia (Pando): 140 s.; more in Brazil.

Mashco-Piro:Peru (Madre de Dios): limited contact, no data.

Mojo (includes the varieties Ignaciano and Trinitario): Bolivia (Beni): over

10,000 s.

Paraujano or A˜nun or A˜nuu:Venezuela (Zulia): 20–30 s.

Paunaca: Bolivia (Santa Cruz): a few.

Piapoco:Colombia (Meta, Guan´ıa, Vichada): 4,466 s.; Venezuela (Amazonas):

1,167–3,000 s.

612 Appendix

Piro or Yine:Peru (Cuzco, Loreto, Madre de Dios, Ucayali): 2,150–3,500 s.

Res´ıgaro:Peru (Loreto): 11 s. in 1971 (in mixed group with Bora and Huitoto).

Tariana: Colombia (Vaup´es): ethnic group of 332; more in Brazil; 100 s. in both

countries (Aikhenvald 1999).

Wa rekena:Venezuela (Amazonas): 400–500 s.; more in Brazil.

Yavitero:Venezuela (Amazonas): 1 s.; similar to Baniva del Guain´ıa.

Yucuna: Colombia (Amazonas): 500 s.

Presumably extinct languages belonging to this family:

Amarizana: Colombia (Casanare).

Apolista or Lapachu: Bolivia (La Paz).

Caquet´ıo:Venezuela (Apure, Falc´on, Lara, Yaracuy); Dutch Antilles (Aruba, Bonaire,

Cura¸cao).

Chan´e:Argentina (Salta); Bolivia (Santa Cruz); language shifted to Chiriguano.

Gar´u or Guar´u: Colombia (Amazonas).

Maipure: Colombia (Vichada).

Paiconeca: Bolivia (Santa Cruz).

Saraveca: Bolivia (Santa Cruz).

Atacame˜no or Kunza: isolate. Argentina (Salta); Chile (Antofagasta); possibly also

Bolivia (Potos´ı); possible subgroups in Argentina: Apatama, Casavindo,

Churumata, Cochinoca; reportedly extinct.

Aymaran: language family, three languages.

Aymara: Bolivia (Cochabamba, La Paz, Oruro, Potos´ı): 1,600,000 s.; Chile (Tarapac´a):

16,000 s.; Peru (Moquegua, Puno, Tacna): 466,000 s.

Cauqui:Peru (Lima): 11 s. in larger community.

Jaqaru:Peru (Lima): 725 s.

Bagua or Patag´on de Bagua: unclassiﬁed. Peru (Amazonas, Cajamarca); extinct.

Barbacoan: language family, ﬁve languages.

Awa Pit or Cuaiquer: Colombia (Nari˜no): ethnic group of 13,000; Ecuador (Carchi):

2,000–3,000; percentage of speakers unknown.

Cha



palaachi or Chachi or Cayapa or Nigua: Ecuador (Esmeraldas): 7,600 s.

Guambiano: Colombia (Cauca): ethnic group of 20,780, mostly speakers.

Totor´o: Colombia (Cauca): 4 s. in community of 3,600.

Tsaﬁki or Colorado: Ecuador (Pichincha): 2,000 s.

Extinct languages belonging to this family:

Barbacoa: Colombia (Nari˜no).

Cara: Ecuador (Imbabura, Pichincha); afﬁliation uncertain.

Coconuco: Colombia (Cauca).

Pasto (including Muellamues): Colombia (Nari˜no); Ecuador (Carchi).

Sindagua or Malla: Colombia (Nari˜no).

Inventory of Andean languages and language families 613

Betoi: language family. Colombia (Arauca, Casanare); Venezuela (Apure); several ethnic

groups: Airico, Betoi, Ele, Jirara, Lolaca, Situfa, etc.; the languages are extinct.

Bora-Huitoto: language family consisting of two distinct subfamilies.

Boran:

Bora: Colombia (Amazonas): 646 s.; Peru (Loreto): 2,000 s.

Mira˜na: Colombia (Amazonas): 660 s.

Muinane: Colombia (Amazonas): 547 s.

Huitotoan:

Huitoto (subgroups M-in-ica, Murui, N-ipode): Colombia (Amazonas, Caquet´a,

Putumayo): 6,245 s.; Peru (Loreto): 1,133–1,917 s.

Nonuya: Colombia (Amazonas): 2 s.

Ocaina: Colombia (Amazonas): 126 s.; Peru (Loreto): 54–188 s.

Cahuapanan: language family with two surviving languages; possibly related to

Jivaroan.

Chayahuita:Peru (Loreto, San Mart´ın): 7,875–13,717 s.

Jebero:Peru (Loreto): 500–2,500 s.; language becoming obsolescent.

Probably extinct language belonging to this group:

Cahuapana:Peru (Loreto).

Canichana: isolate. Bolivia (Beni). 3 semi-speakers in community of 583 (ﬁeld data

Crevels).

Candoshi: language family with one surviving language.

Candoshi or Murato or Shapra:Peru (Loreto): 1,900–3,000 s.

Extinct languages belonging to this family:

Chirino:Peru (Amazonas, Cajamarca).

Rabona: Ecuador (Zamora-Chinchipe); afﬁliation uncertain.

Ca˜nar-Puruh´a: putative language family; two languages, both extinct.

Ca˜nar: Ecuador (Azuay, Ca˜nar, Chimborazo, El Oro, Loja).

Puruh´a: Ecuador (Bol´ıvar, Chimborazo, Tungurahua).

Cariban: language family.

Carijona or Guaque or Hianacoto or Umaua: Colombia (Amazonas, Guaviare): 30 s.

Japreria:Venezuela (Zulia): number included in Yucpa.

Yukpa or Yuco or Motilones mansos: Colombia (Cesar): 3,529 s.; Venezuela (Zulia):

1,500–3,500 s.

Extinct languages belonging to this family:

Op´on–Carare: Colombia (Santander); probably extinct; maybe two languages.

Patag´on:Peru (Amazonas, Cajamarca).

Extinct languages which may have belonged to this family:

Muzo–Colima: Colombia (Boyac´a, Cundinamarca).

Panche: Colombia (Cundinamarca, Tolima).