|Linguistic classification||One of the world's primary language families|
The Nadahup languages, also known as Makú (Macú) or Vaupés–Japurá, form a small language family in Brazil, Colombia, and Venezuela. The name Maku is pejorative, being derived from an Arawakan word meaning "without speech". Nadahup is an acronym of the constituent languages.
The Nadahup family should not be confused with several other languages which go by the name Maku, including the Maku language of Roraima. There are proposals linking this unclassified language with Nadahup, but also with other languages.
Nadahup consists of about four languages, based on mutual intelligibility. Nadeb and Kuyawi, Hup and Yahup, and Nukak and Kakwa, however, share 90% of their vocabulary and are mutually intelligible, and so are separate languages only in a sociolinguistic sense. These four branches are not close: Although the family was first suggested in 1906, only 300 cognates have been found, which include pronouns but no other grammatical forms.
|father||ʔɨb||ʔip||ʔiːp||ʔiːp (Kakwa ʔip)|
Nadëb may be the most divergent; of the other languages, there is disagreement on the placement of Nïkâk. Martins (1999) propose two classifications, pending further research:
- Martins, proposal A
- Martins, proposal B
Dâw and Hup—especially Hup—have undergone grammatical restructuring under Tucano influence. They have lost prefixes but acquired suffixes from grammaticalized verb roots. They also have heavily monosyllabic roots, as can be seen by the reduction of Portuguese loan words to their stressed syllable, as in Dâw yẽl’ "money", from Portuguese dinheiru. Nadëb and Nïkâk, on the other hand, have polysyllabic roots. Nïkâk allows a single prefix per word, whereas Nadëb, which lies outside the Vaupés language area, is heavily prefixing and polysynthetic: Up to nine prefixes per word (which is highly unusual for the Amazon), with incorporation of nouns, prepositions, and adverbs.
Rivet (from 1920), Kaufman (1994) and Pozzobon (1997) include Puinave within the family. However, many of the claimed cognate sets are spurious.
Henley, Mattéi-Müller and Reid (1996) present evidence that the Hodï language (also known as Yuwana) is related.
- Hammarström, Harald; Forkel, Robert; Haspelmath, Martin, eds. (2017). "Nadahup". Glottolog 3.0. Jena, Germany: Max Planck Institute for the Science of Human History.
- Epps. P. A Grammar of Hup. Mouton de Gruyter. 2008. ISBN 978-3-11-019588-0.
- Patience Epps, The Vaupés Melting Pot: Tucanoan Influence on Hup. In Aikhenvald & Dixon, Grammars in contact: a cross-linguistic typology, 2006:130
- Patience Epps, 2008. A Grammar of Hup. Mouton de Gruyter.
- Hup Vocabulary List (from the World Loanword Database)
- Campbell, Lyle. (1997). American Indian languages: The historical linguistics of Native America. New York: Oxford University Press. ISBN 0-19-509427-1.
- Greenberg, Joseph H. (1987). Language in the Americas. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
- Henley, Paul; Marie-Claude Mattéi-Müller y Howard Reid (1996): "Cultural and linguistic affinities of the foraging people of North Amazonia: a new perspective"; Antropológica 83: 3–37. Caracas.
- Kaufman, Terrence. (1990). Language history in South America: What we know and how to know more. In D. L. Payne (Ed.), Amazonian linguistics: Studies in lowland South American languages (pp. 13–67). Austin: University of Texas Press. ISBN 0-292-70414-3.
- Kaufman, Terrence. (1992) Guta
- Kaufman, Terrence. (1994). The native languages of South America. In C. Mosley & R. E. Asher (Eds.), Atlas of the world's languages (pp. 46–76). London: Routledge.
- Pozzobon, Jorge (1997). Langue, société et numération chez les Indiens Makú (Haut Rio Negro, Brésil). Journal de la Société de Américanistes de París 83: 159–172. París.
- Rivet, Paul y Constant Tastevin 1920: "Affinités du Makú et du Puinave"; Journal de la Société des Américanistes de París, n.s. t XII: 69–82. París.
- Rivet, Paul; P. P. Kok y C. Tastevin 1925: "Nouvele contributión a l'étude de la langue Makú; International Journal of American Linguistics, vol. 3, n. 24, p.p. 129–132. New York.