Inland Gulf

Timothy Usher, Santa Fe Institute

The Inland Gulf family is comprised of six languages spoken in geographically separated enclaves inland of the Kiwai languages along the northwest coast of the Papuan Gulf in Papua New Guinea's Gulf and Western provinces.

The internal classification of Inland Gulf is as follows:

Inland Gulf

Ipiko

West Inland Gulf

Foia Foia

Hoia Hoia

Hoyahoya

Mahigi

Mubami

Franklin (1973: 270-271) provides lexicostatistical figures for five Inland Gulf vocabularies as follows, with Foia Foia represented by Franklin's Minanibai and Johnston's (1919-1920) Eme-eme and Mubami by Franklin's Tao-Suamato. The unrelated Karami language of Flint (1917-1918) is included due to a large number of loans from Foia Foia:

Johnston (1919-1920: 120) 120 comparative terms for Eme-eme (Foia Foia) of Korariperamesina or Pepeha village

Cridland (1923-1924: 58) 130 comparative terms for Mahigi

Chance (1925-1926: 91) 131 comparative terms for Ipiko of Amipoki village

Franklin (1973: 270-273) miscellaneous notes including lexicostatistics, phonological observations and pronouns for Ipiko (Ibigo,) Minanibai (Foia Foia) and Tao-Suamato (Mubami)

Franklin ed. (1973: 577-578,) Franklin (1975: 264-268) 100 comparative terms for Ipiko, Minanibai and Tao-Suamato

Reesink (1976: 31-34) 100 comparative terms for Tao-Suamato

Reesink (n.d.) survey vocabulary of Tao-Suamato provided in comparative spreadsheet format by Paul Whitehouse via the Summer Institute of Linguistics, Ukarumpa

Carr (1991) 120 comparative terms for Foyafoya of Bibisa village, Hoyahoya of Matakia and Hoia Hoia of Ukusi-Kaperami

Carr (1991) 99 comparative terms for Ipiko, Minanibai and Mubami

Carr (2006) sketch phonology of Hoyahoya

Carr (2006) 164 comparative terms and 20 comparative phrases for Pepeha village (Foia Foia)

Carr (2006) sketch phonology of Hoyahoya

MacKenzie (2002) 176 comparative terms and 19 comparative phrases for Mubami of Ugu/Kala, Parieme and Sogae villages

Petterson (2002) 170 comparative terms and 2 comparative phrases for the Eva dialect of Ipiko

Petterson (2007: 17-32) 971 terms for Eva of Pakeuaba village

Petterson (2014) 204 comparative terms and 26 comparative phrases for Foeafoea of Bibisa village

Petterson (2014) notes on Eva grammar

Petterson (2014) dictionary of Eva and Ibigo

Allen and Keneqa (2006) sketch phonology of Foia Foia with no glosses

Franklin (1968: 27-28) recognizes West Inland Gulf as Bamu-Turaman Family including Pepeha, Mahigi and Karami. Denies relationship to    Kikori River. Ipiko (Ipikoi) (p. 28-29) unclassified isolate.

Franklin (1973: 269-272) Ipiko added to form Inland Gulf.

Franklin (1975: 861) Inland Gulf sub-phylum level stock in Trans New Guinea phylum with special relationship to Kikori River (Turama-Kikorian) as well as Central and South New Guinea Stock.

Greenberg (1971: 829,) misled by the presence of loans in both directions, included the Inland Gulf languages in his Kiwai subgroup of South New Guinea; this placement was sharply contested by Franklin (1973: 382-383.)

[under construction]

Proto-Inland Gulf had 13 or 14 consonants and at least 5 vowels as follows:

Neither final consonants nor consonant clusters occur.

Stress appears to have been contrastive (cf. /*ka'ɸuto/ “smoke” vs. /*gene'ɸo/ “bandicoot”) but has not been reconstructed below.

Intial consonants correspond as follows:

Medial consonants correspond as follows:

Vowels and vowel sequences correspond as follows:

These correspondences are exemplified as follows, with Ipiko attestations drawn from Petterson (2007: 17-32, 2014) unless otherwise indicated. Petterson's Ibigo dialect forms are indicated [ib]. Those drawn from Chance (1925-1926: 91) are indicated [sc]; those drawn from Franklin (1973: ) are indicated [kf]. Foia Foia forms are phonemicizations based upon Johnston's (1919-1920: 120) Eme-Eme, Franklin's (1973: 577-578) Minanibai, Carr's (1991) Foyafoya, Carr's (2006) Pepeha and Petterson's (2014) Foeafoea. Hoia Hoia attestations are drawn from Carr (1991.) Hoyahoya attestations are drawn from Carr (1991, 2006.) Mahigi attestations are drawn from Cridland (1923-1924: 58.) Mubami forms are phonemicizations based upon Franklin's (1973: 578) Tao-Suamato, Reesink's (1976: 31-34) Tao-Suamato and MacKenzie's (2002) Mubami.

West Inland Gulf forms unaccompanied by an Ipiko word and without outcomparisons may not have dated to proto-Inland Gulf, but are presented as Inland Gulf for the sake of convenience.

Bilabial nasal /*m/ is retained as such in all descendants:

Initial apical nasal /*n/ is retained as such in all descendants:

Medial /*n/ is denasalized to non-stop /ɾ/ in Mahigi and to lateral /l/ in Mubami:

Bilabial voiceless stop /*p/ is retained as such in all descendants:

In one example, medial /*p/ is unexpectedly reflected as fricative /ɸ/ in MacKenzie's Mubami:

Initial apical voiceless stop /*t/ is retained as such in all descendants:

Medial /*t/ is sporadically lenited to [d r] in Hoyahoya and Mahigi:

Velar voiceless stop /*k/ is reflected as glottal stop /ʔ/, heard as zero initially, in Ipiko and in Mubami (Franklin 1973: 272):

Bilabial voiced stop /*b/ ia retained as such in all descendants:

Apical voiced stop /*d/ is generally retained as such in all descendants:

…:

Initial velar voiced stop /*g/ is retained as such in all descendants:

Medial /*g/ undergoes subphonemic lenition in Mubami, a development shared with the Kerewo and northeastern dialects of Kiwai (q.v. Shafer 1965: CITE):

Unlike anterior voiced stops /*b *d/ which reflect Fly River prenasalized /*mb *nd/, Inland Gulf /*g/ probably cannot reflect /*ŋg/, which instead yields /*ɣ̃/ (below) both initially and medially. Only one example of /*g/, /*mogo/ “neck”, is known to have a potential outcomparison in Zimakani (Begua) [mɔŋgo] (Voorhoeve 1970: 11;) it seems simplest to assume this resemblance a coincidence.

Bilabial fricative /*ɸ/ is deccluded to /h/ in Ipiko, Hoia Hoia, Hoyahoya and Mahigi, and sporadically to /ɸ/ [h] in Mubami (Franklin 1973: 272):

One example …:

…:

Initial fricative /*s/ is deoccluded to /h/ in Ipiko, Hoia Hoia, Hoyahoya and Mahigi (Franklin 1973: 272):

Medial /*s/ is deoccluded to /h/ in Mubami as well, being preserved as such only in Foia Foia:

Bilabial non-stop /*w/ …:

One example …:

Apical non-stop /*ɾ/ …:

Initial palatal non-stop /*j/ is apirated to /h/ in the Eva dialect of Ipiko, occluded to /ɾ/ in the Ibigo dialect of Ipiko (q.v. Petterson 2014 ibid.) and in Foia Foia, and occluded to /d/ in Mahigi and Mubami:

When /*j/ is followed by a nasal consonant in the next syllable onset, it is occluded to apical nasal /n/ in Foia Foia:

…:

…:

The development of initial velar nasalized non-stop /*ɣ̃/ is visible only in the second person singular:

Medial /*ɣ̃/ is reflected as apical nasal [n], presumably via velar nasal [*ŋ], in all descendants. Unlike the reflexes of apical /*n/, these aren't denasalized in Mahigi and Mubami:

In one example, medial /*ɣ̃/ is reflected as /m/ in Foia Foia, preseumably because it is preceded by /*m/ in the onset of the previous syllable. It's not clear if Mubami's medial /g/ is a similarly-conditioned reflex of /ɣ̃/ or an immediate loan from Kiwai /*magota/:

“Cassowary” is a loan from Turama River /*sigina/ (q.v. Franklin 1968: 32,) allowing us to confirm the original value of /*(ŋ)g/. This is supported by Fly River /*maŋgot/ “mouth”, /*piŋgi/ “arm”, /*n[a/o]ŋgit/ “moquito”, /*s[e/a]ŋga/ 'hand', from which the development of /*g/ might be expected. A lenition similar to that which must have occurred in pre-Inland Gulf is found in Kuni dialect of Boazi, in which Fly River /*ŋg/ is reflected as [ŋɣ]; e.g. [maŋɣat] “language” < /*maŋgot/ (q.v. Fumey 2006: 2.)

… vowels …/*i *u *e *o *a/ …

High front vowel /*i/ is generally retained as such in all descendants:

One example …:

High back vowel /*u/ is retained as such in all descendants:

Mid front vowel /*e/ is generally retained as such in all descendants:

… /*eCi/ …:

… /*eCu/ …:

Mid back vowel /*o/ is retained as such in all descendants:

Low central vowel /*a/ is generally retained as such in all descendants:

… /*aCi/ …:

…:

…:

… /*aCu/ …:

… vowel sequences …

The sequence /*ia/ is retained as such in all descendants:

… /*ia/ …:

… /*io/ …:

One exception in Mubami is likely due to stress:

… /*ua/ …:

… /*ei/ …:

The sequence /*ea/ is simplified to /*a/ in the western languages, and is merged with /e/ in Ipiko under unknown conditions:

… /*oi/ …:

… /*ou/ …:

… /*ai/ …:

… /*au/ …:

… /*ae/ …:

…:

Inland Gulf languages indicate gender in (at least) some human nominals and agreeing adjectives according to same vocalism as Marind-Yaqay and Boazi (q.v. Drabbe 1954: CITE, 1955: CITE,) with masculine singular indicated by /*e/, feminine singular by /*u/, animate plural by /*i/ and neuter by /*o/:

Inland Gulf free pronouns are reconstructed as follows:

Object and inalienable possessive prefixes are based primarily upon comparison of Ipiko forms to those of other subfamilies of Fly River, and are reconstructed as follows:

It's probable that a full set of prefixes is present in all Inland Gulf languages but is simply not visible in the brief survey vocabularies.

[under construction]

Loans from Kiwai …:

Loans to Kiwai and Tabo:

Loans from Dibiyaso or the ancestor or close relative thereof are found in Mubami, Mahigi and Hoyahoya:

Loans from Kikori River:

Loans from Motu: