Shabo language


Shabo is an endangered language and likely language isolate spoken by about 400 former hunter-gatherers in southwestern Ethiopia, in the westernmost part of the Southern Nations, Nationalities, and People's Region.
Its classification is uncertain, though it appears to be a Nilo-Saharan language. It was first reported to be a separate language by Lionel Bender in 1977, based on data gathered by missionary Harvey Hoekstra. A grammar was published in 2015.

Demographics

Shabo speakers live in three places in the Keficho Shekicho Zone: Anderaccha, Gecha, and Kaabo.
As they shift from hunting and gathering to more settled agriculture and to working as laborers, many of its speakers are shifting to other neighboring languages, in particular Majang language and Shekkacho ; its vocabulary is heavily influenced by loanwords from both these languages, particularly Majangir, as well as Amharic.

Classification

Once the many loanwords from its immediate neighbors, Majang and Shakicho, are removed, the wordlists collected show a significant number of Koman words side by side with a larger number of words with no obvious external relationships. The tentative grammar so far collected offers few obviously convincing external similarities. On this basis, Fleming has classified Shabo as Nilo-Saharan and, within Nilo-Saharan, as nearest to Koman. Anbessa & Unseth consider it Nilo-Saharan, but present little by way of argument for their position, and no detail on its position within the family. Schnoebelen in his phylogenetic analysis says that Shabo is best treated as an isolate, but does not exclude the possibility of contradicting evidence gained from applying the comparative method ; Kibebe evaluates Schnoebelen as the most rigorous comparison to date. Blench maintains that Shabo does pattern with the Nilo-Saharan family, and that recent data on Gumuz helped tie the languages together. More recently, Blench classifies Shabo as a language isolate, noting little evidence for it being part of Nilo-Saharan.
Blench lists the following similarities among Shabo, Gumuz, and Koman lexical forms.
GlossShaboGumuzKoman
headƙoyProto-Common Gumuz *kʷaProto-Koman *kup
breastkowanProto-Common Gumuz *kúáProto-Koman *koy
hornkulbeGuba dialect k’əlaKwama kwaap
sunukʰa, oxaYaso dialect okaKomo kʰaala

The comparison with reconstructed languages of the Surmic and Koman branch as well as three languages from the Gumuz branch shows slight phonological similarity for the first person singular of Proto-Southwest Surmic and the probable ancestor of the Gumuz languages but additional information is lacking and, otherwise, so far it does not seem very approximate.
MeaningShaboProto-Southwest SurmicProto-Southeast SurmicProto-KomanNorthern GumuzSouthern GumuzDaats'in
Itiŋŋ, ta, ti*anɛɛtta*aɲɲe*akʰaáɗaáraáɗa
you, sg.kukk, kuŋg*iɲɲV*ai; *aina?ámaáamámam
he, sheji, oŋŋaáχóáŋajáárʔám
wejiŋŋ, jaŋfu*aggetta*agge*aman, *ana, *min-?
you, pl.sitalak, silak, subak*aggitta*uma
oneiŋki*koɗoi*ɗemetáametáammité
twobab*ramma*ramman*suk-

The number "iŋki" has been compared to Lowland East Cushitic "tneki" and Saho "inik".

Phonology

The consonants are:
BilabialAlveolarPalatalVelarGlottal
Plosives
Implosives
Ejectives
Fricatives
Approximants
Nasals
Trills

Consonants in parentheses are not entirely phonemic according to Teferra :
Implosive consonants are common in languages of the area, but ejective consonants are not found in Majang.
Consonant length is found in several words, such as walla "goat", kutti "knee"; however, it is often unstable.
Teferra tentatively postulates 9 vowels:, possibly with further distinctions based on advanced tongue root. Five of these,, have long counterparts. Occasionally final vowels are deleted, shortening medial vowels: e.g. deego or deg "crocodile".
The syllable structure is V; all consonants except and can occur syllable-finally.
The language is tonal, but its tonology is unclear. Two minimal pairs are cited by Teferra 1995, including "kill" versus "meat".

Grammar

Syntax

Basic word order is subject–object–verb; there are postpositions rather than prepositions.

Pronouns

Shabo has an unusually complex pronoun system for Africa:
NumberSingularDualPlural
1. masc.tiŋŋ, ta, tiantʃjiŋŋ
1. fem.taannjaŋfu
2. masc.kukktʃitʃaksitalak, silak
2. fem.kuŋgsijaksubak
3. masc.jiotʃtʃaodda
3. fem.oŋŋaojjaotala

The pronouns "I" and "he" have been compared to Surmic languages; however, there are also resemblances in the pronouns with the Gumuz languages. The gender distinctions made are unusual for Africa.

Verbs

is by adding the particle be after the verb or noun negated: gumu be " not stick", ʔam be-gea "he will not come". Negative forms in b are widespread in Nilo-Saharan and Afro-Asiatic languages.
There appears to be a causative suffix -ka: mawo hoop "water boiled" → upa mawo hoop-ka " man boiled water".
A particle git marks the verb in constructions with "want": moopa git inɗeet "I want to sit".
Much of the verbal morphology is uncertain; there appears to be a 3rd person singular future suffix -g- and a 2nd person plural suffix -ɗe

Nouns

Plurals are optional; when used, they are formed with a word yɛɛro afterwards.
There is a suffix -ka which sometimes mark the direct object, e.g. upa kaan-ik ye "a man saw a dog", but also has many other uses. A similar suffix is found in many Eastern Sudanic languages, but there is it specifically accusative.

Postpositions

Shabo uses postpositions after nouns, e.g.: upa mana pond ɗɛpik moi "a man sat on a rock".

Numbers

Sample sentences