Previous descriptions of Ikoma and Nata

7

1.2 Previous descriptions of Ikoma and Nata

Aside from listings of Ikoma or Nata in Bantu classifications, there are very few previous mentions of any kind in the literature. Two of the previous references are actually to Nata, not Ikoma, but they are useful to mention in light of the close relationship between the two groups. Mekacha 1993 is a monograph discussing the sociolinguistic impact of Swahili on the use of the Nata language. It is focused much more on sociolinguistic issues than linguistic ones and is not relevant to the issues at hand. There are two instances of previous work on IkomaNata vowels, and one on Ikoma tone. Aunio 2010 is a recent description of nominal tone in Ikoma. The introduction to tone given in §2.4 draws heavily from her work, so further comment will not be made here. Concerning vowels, the first hint in the literature is Guthrie’s 1971 brief description of Nata prefix alternations. He lists both Nata and Ikoma together under E.45, so his description presumably applies to both varieties. In his notations on Ikoma’s departure from the other E.40 languages, he identifies the same seven vowels and prefix alternations as are argued for in this thesis. Specifically, he uses the example of class 3 prefixes to note the occurrence of [omo-] before stem-initial [e, i, o, u] and [omu-] before [a, , ]. 3 below shows his exact notation, using the more traditional Bantu vowel transcriptions. 3 Guthrie’s 1971 45 notation of Class 3 prefix alternations m + 1 , i 1 , 1 , u 1 mu + a 1 , 1 , 1 He also records that class 9 and 10 prefixes are [an] and [t an], which is a departure from other E.40 languages which have the front vowels [e, i] alternating in these prefixes. 8 Guthrie’s observations on these class 910 prefixes are also in line with my data from Nata and Ikoma. The only other previous work on Ikoma or Nata of which I am aware is Mekacha 1985, which is an M.A. thesis from the University of Dar es Salaam entitled “Phonological processes affecting Ki-Nata vowels.” Mekacha’s work is primarily a description of instances of vowel hiatus resolution and only briefly mentions matters related to vowel harmony. I disagree, however, with some of the basic facts which he presents. He explicitly argues for only five vowels in the language, whereas I argue that there are seven in both Nata and Ikoma. Mekacha also concludes that vowel length is not phonemic in Nata, but again I argue that Nata as well as Ikoma not only has seven vowels, but that it does have phonemic vowel length as well, as is described in §3.3 below. Mekacha’s analysis of vowel harmony is also quite different and much more limited than the analysis which I adopt. Furthermore, since the prefix alternations which Guthrie 1971 presented are consistent with the basic claims I make here, I conclude that Mekacha either missed the two additional vowel phonemes or that his data is from a 5- vowel dialect which is not representative of the Ikoma and Nata languages as a whole. Though I do not attempt to make a direct or lengthy argument against Mekacha’s claims, I do discuss some of his analysis in more detail in §3.4 after the presentation of the seven- vowel inventory which I am proposing.

1.3 Ikoma’s Neighbors