The relationship between Lugbara and Madi .1 Background

28

3.1.5.3 Grammatical Similarity

Since the Kaliko grammar data are not available, this comparison cannot be made.

3.1.5.4 Intelligibility

Since intelligibility testing was not done not currently possible in the Sudanese Madi area, it is not proven that Kaliko and Madi are inherently mutually unintelligible. However, it would appear that speakers of these two languages do not understand one another’s first language. Madis and Kalikos use Juba Arabic to communicate with each other, particularly in Juba.

3.1.5.5 Sociolinguistic dynamics

It is said that when necessary, Kalikos learn Madi and Madis learn Kaliko, with no evidence that one group is more likely to learn the other’s tongue than vice versa.

3.1.5.6 Conclusion

Kaliko is distinct from Madi. The dialect called Kaliko-Madi simply recognizes its descent from Madi. 3.1.6 The relationship between Lugbara and Madi 3.1.6.1 Background Lugbara and Madi are each spoken primarily in Uganda, and exhibit the greatest degree of chaining of all pairs of Moru-Madi cluster pairs. The relationship of these two groups has been presented in a variety of ways. There seems to be agreement that “Standard” Arua Lugbara is quite distinct from the Madi spoken at Moyo; these are in fact the reference dialects for the Lugbara Bible and Madi New Testament, respectively. Furthermore, Zairean Lugbara is very like ‘standard’ Lugbara, while Sudanese Madi dialects closely resemble Moyo-Madi. However, the speech forms spoken by Lugbara people somewhat north of Arua in Maracha, Terego, and Aringa counties and the ‘southern Madi’ speech varieties on the west bank of the Nile considerably upstream from Moyo at Ogoko and Okollo in Okollo county of West Nile district are not so easily categorized. Ladefoged et al. analyzed wordlist data from seven LugbaraMadi dialects in Uganda. Their conclusion, based on this analysis of 97 elicited lexical items in each ‘dialect’, was that [t]here seems to be some form of dialect continuum, with the Aringa dialect of Lugbara actually being closer to the Ogoko dialect of Madi than to either of the other Lugbara dialects. 1972:79 Some Lugbara, like Kaliko, refer to their language as ‘Madi’, but do not mean to imply mutual intelligibility. For this reason, the so-called ‘southern Madi’ dialects in Okollo County are treated as Lugbara dialects here. See section 3.2.4 for further discussion of Lugbara. 29 Crazzolara 1960 entitled his work A Study of the Logbara Ma’di Language. In it, he says “The Logbara language belongs to the Ma’di group of languages.... All Logbara agree... that they are of the Ma’di nation, that they are Ma’di.” p. v Yet, according to his account, the Lugbara have been a separate people for a very long time, and he suggests that they represent three groups who migrated independently to their present area. Many other sources see Appendix 8 state that there are really two kinds of Lugbara, “High Lugbara” and “Low Lugbara”, and suggest these form a bridge between Kaliko and Ma’di, perhaps in a continuum of this sort: | | | | Kaliko High Lugb. Low Lugb. Ma’di Zaïre Zaïre, Ug. Uganda Ug.,Sudan This question is discussed in Appendix 8. Suffice it to say here that the researchers approach this claim with skepticism. Generally speaking, Sudanese Ma’di do not have contact with Lugbara, and Zairean Lugbaras do not have contact with Ma’di.

3.1.6.2 Lexical Similarity

The following figures represent percentage of similar vocabulary items for each pair of speech forms, out of a sample of approximately 160 lexical items. OkolloU 86 OgokoU 85 89 ‘Zairean Lugbara’ 87 90 98 ‘Ugandan Lugbara’ 88 90 95 95 MarachaU 82 91 89 91 93 TeregoU 80 87 87 85 88 89 AringaU 76 83 84 81 82 80 82 Ugandan Ma’di 72 81 82 81 79 78 80 99 Ma’di-LokaiS 72 79 80 79 77 76 78 96 98 Ma’di-’Burulo 67 72 74 73 73 68 72 80 80 83 LuluboS 30 Additional words were elicited for some of the Ugandan dialects; the following figures lexical similarity and margin of error are based on a sample of 190 to 195 lexical items more details in section 3.2.4.2. Okollo 85±2½ Ogoko 86±2½ 92±2 ‘Ugandan Lugbara’ 86±2½ 92±2 96±1½ Maracha 81±3 91±2 92±2 93±2 Terego 78±3 87±2½ 85±2½ 87±2½ 88±2½ Aringa 74±4 84±3 82±3 83±3 81±3½ 81±3 Ugandan Ma’di There is close chaining in evidence here, but of a radial kind: beginning with ‘standard’ Lugbara, we can cluster Maracha with Lugbara at 96, then Terego and Ogoko at 92 and Aringa at around 86 or 87. Terego and Aringa, the northernmost Lugbara dialects, are as dissimilar to Okollo as to true Ma’di; but Okollo is about as similar to the other Lugbara dialects as Aringa is. There is no clustering of dialects around Ma’di; except for Okollo the Lugbara dialects all have about 82 similar vocabulary to Madi. The WordSurv output for phonetic relationships is shown below. Okollo 24 Ogoko 20 22 ‘Zairean Lugbara’ 18 20 13‘Ugandan Lugbara’ 23 23 17 14 Maracha 25 21 19 18 11 Terego 27 22 22 20 16 9 Aringa 35 34 32 32 32 31 31 Ugandan Madi 35 38 36 35 35 35 35 17 Madi - Lokai 39 38 38 37 37 36 36 19 12 Madi-Burulo 39 41 37 36 37 35 35 32 27 26 Lulubo Each of the three varieties of Madi show less than twenty degrees of phonetic difference from the others. Most of the figures for the comparison of dialects we are classifying as Lugbara are less than twenty-five. The figures for the comparison of Lugbara and Madi or Lulubo are all more than thirty. On phonetic as well as lexical grounds, the division of these speech forms into at least three languages Lugbara, Madi, Lulubo seems well-justified.

3.1.6.3 Grammatical Similarity

No grammatical data were collected in Zairean Lugbara, and the Lulubo data are partial and arrived after analysis was already complete. A discussion of the comparative grammatical relationships of the other Lugbara and Madi dialects may be found in Appendix 10. 31

3.1.6.4 Intelligibility and Sociolinguistic dynamics

The Sudanese Madi have had little contact with the Lugbara, even when they were in Uganda during the first civil war. Fifty-seven people were asked what language they used with the Lugbara; two older women said they could use Lugbara, one man said he knew some Lugbara greetings, three people said they used the trade language Swahili, and the remaining fifty-one people said that they never had contact with the Lugbara people. The Ugandan ‘southern Madi’ interviewed, one person each from Ogoko and Okollo, said that they could not understand Madi as it is spoken at Moyo or in Sudan. The Moyo dialect is the standard in that it is used for radio broadcasts; it was also the dialect of the 1977 Madi New Testament and Psalms. Both of them were students living in the Lugbara-speaking area and said they could speak at least some Lugbara. Unfortunately, they were not asked how well people from their home areas could understand Lugbara. with Lugbara which reflects the fact that Ogoko is more similar to Lugbara than Okollo. The Lugbara respondents were not asked how well they understood Madi, either. They did not even understand all other dialects of Lugbara. If a speaker of a standard Lugbara dialect cannot understand someone from Aringa, it is unlikely that he can understand someone from Moyo, which is more geographically and linguistically distant than Aringa. If people from Aringa or even some from Terego understood Madi better than Standard Lugbara, it would only be as a result of proximity and learning. Some Lugbara speakers of whatever dialect might possibly learn Madi from the radio and thus understand it better than one would predict based on the linguistic data and the lack of social and political contact. However, any such cases would probably be extremely rare, given the language attitudes. It is reasonable to suppose that Zairean Lugbaras would be even less likely than speakers of the standard Ugandan dialect of Lugbara to understand Madi of Moyo or of Sudan.

3.1.6.5 Conclusion

Setting aside the question of whether there is more than one Lugbara dialect see section 3.2.4 and Appendix 8, it is clear that Lugbara is a distinct language from Madi, where by Madi we mean the varieties spoken in Sudan and in the area of Moyo and Adjumani, Uganda. The ‘southern Madi’ dialects, spoken in the area of Rigbo, Ogoko, and Okollo, Uganda, should be considered Lugbara dialects, and more distant from Madi than other Lugbara dialects. Lugbara and Madi, in particular the ‘standard’ varieties, are not inherently mutually intelligible. People of these groups have a strong ethnic identity as Madi or Lugbara except for the ‘southern Madi’ who consider themselves Madi but not the same Madi as found downriver to the northeast. 32

3.2 I