A Preliminary Report of Existing Information on the Manding Languages of West Africa

Summary and Suggestions for Future Research

By Terrence D. Sulllivan

SIL International 2004

2

Contents

1.0 Abstract 2.0 Preface 3.0 Introduction 4.0 Language Listings

4.1 Dyula 4.2 Mauka 4.3 Bambara 4.4 Marka 4.5 Konyanka 4.6 Wassulunka 4.7 Maninka 4.8 Mandinka 4.9 Xassonke 4.10 Diakhanka 4.11 Kurano

5.0 Linguistic Characteristics 5.1 Phonological Characteristics

Tone systems Grammatical Characteristics

6.0 Conclusion References

Dyula Dyula: Technical linguistic Tutorial material Dictionaries, lexiques

Bambara Technical linguistic Tutorial material Dictionnaries, lexiques, orthography

Manding (Malinké) Dictionaries, tutorial material Orthography, literacy national policies Literature General articles

Material done with respect to one country, by country Gambia Guineau-Bissau Ivory Coast Mali Senegal

Material with respect to a particular language, by language Mandinka Maninka Mauka Marka Worodugu

3

Worodugu Xassonke

Mande languages, in general Bibliographies General references regarding study of African languages Sociolinguistic or survey related

4

1.0 Abstract This report focuses on the Manding languages as they are found in Ivory Coast, Mali, Guinea, Sierra Leone, Sene-

gal, Gambia, and Guinea. Bissau. It summarizes existing work on many of these languages. The report catalogs vari-ous dialects in some countries. Linguistic characteristics are provided, as well as a varied list of references.

2.0 Preface This study was done during May to July of 1983, in Abidjan, Ivory Coast. The purpose of the study is to summa-

rize information I have obtained about the Manding family of languages, one of the most widespread language groups of West Africa. I am grateful to the Abidjan personnel of the Société International de Linguistique, and also to M. Pascal Kokora, M. Kalilou Tera, and M. Tanoh of the Institut de Linguistique Appliquée, of the Université d’ Abidjan. They have been of great help during my time in Abidjan.

The paper contains five parts, as follows. • Introduction (section 3.0) • Listing of languages, with various information (4.0) • Linguistic characteristics (5.0) • Conclusion (6.0) • Notes to text (7.0) • Categorized list of references (8.0) • Appendix, with information on scripture in certain languages (9.0)

The purpose of this report is to provide information so that it may be used by others interested in Manding lan-guages.

Names of languages as they are normally referred to will be written with a capital letter for the first letter, for ex-ample, Bambara. Names of languages, as called by the speakers themselves, will be written with all noncapitalized letters, for example, bamanakan. Phonetic or phonological transcription will be generally the same as the source where the data was found. When explanation is needed or if there is some deviation, an accompanying note will be provided.

3.0 Introduction Greenberg (1963) places the Manding1 languages in the Northern Mande group of the Northern-Western division

of Mande. The Northern-Western division of Mange ranges over Ivory Coast, Upper Volta, Mali, Guinea, Liberia, Sierra Leone, Senegal, Gambia, and Guinea-Bissau. Figure 1 from Platiel (1978:43) provides a good sketch of the extent of the Northern-Western branch of Mande languages.

1Other names which have been used as referring to Manding, are Mandingo and Mandekan. Keita (1979:1) points out the advantage of the term

“Mandenkan.” It reflects the distinctions deriving from (1) the name of the region – manden; (2) the inhabitants of the region – mandenka; (3) the language of the region – le mandekan. The term “Malinke” seems to be a poorly-defined cover term used (inconsistently) for Manding dialects in various areas in different countries. For example, Dyula of Ivory Coast is sometimes referred to as Malinke. (Manka speakers of Western Ivory Coast call Dyula speakers malinga.) The northwest region of Ivory Coast often appears on maps as the “malinke” region. “Malinke,” somewhat synonymous to Manding, is also used sometime for Manding dialects in other countries such as Gambia, Guinea, and Mali. I will generally try not to use the term “Malinke” for any of the language groups or dialects. However, when discussing certain data or references, the term may need to be used.

5

Figure 1. Carte linguistique de la famille Mandé (Suzanne Platiel 1978)

6

The Manding branch of languages has been characterized different ways. Delafosse (1901) used the term “Mand-ingue” as representing these widespread dialects. He notes such regional terms as maning, manding, mandi, mani, mandeng, maneng, mandé, mané (Houis 1981:9). The terms “Mande Tan” and “Mande Fu” were Delafosse’s terms for internal classification of Manding, based on the morpheme for ten in various dialects.2 This put the Malinke-Bambara-Dyula complex together with Soninke, Khasonke, and Vai as the Mande Tan group. The Mande Fu group was comprised of Susu, Mande, Loko, Kpelle, Loma, Bandi, and Busa.

Westermann and Bryan (1952) also follow this distinction. However, Prost (1953) proposed a different classifica-tion scheme, which was distinguished by the three groups; Northern (which contained “Mande Tan” languages), Southern-Western, and Southern-Eastern (which contained “Mande Fu” languages). Greenberg (1963) and Welmers (1958) lexico-statistic studies also carry this three-way distinction of Northern, Southern-Western, and Southern-Eastern. Northern Mande and Southern-Western Mande are subgroups of Northern-Western Mande. Thus Southern-Eastern and Northern Western divisions are the first branches of Mande; as follows.

Mande

NWM SEM NM SWM

Long (1971a) characterizes former proposed classifications of Mande languages by two periods: the Mande-

Tan/Mande-Fu period, which was 1900–1950; and the Lexical period, which was 1950–1971.3 Since the advent of Long’s lexico-statistical reworking of the existing data and provision of new word lists, major revisions have con-tinued to be made.

The modifications made since Welmers 1971 can be represented by the work of Long (1971a), Bimson 1978), and Galtier (1981). This could constitute another period in the history of Mande classification, which I will call the Re-visionist period.

Taking the revisions in order, first Long changes the classification due to additional word lists, and using a four-way lexico-statistical distinction instead of the simple cognate/noncognate two-way distinction.4 The resulting modi-fications are that Soninke and Bozo are not included in the Northern subgroup at all; Xassonke (Khasonke) is in-cluded with Mandekan; Kuranko is added to the Northern subgroup with the Vai, Kono, Ligbi languages. (Sembla and Samogho are included in this group also.)

Bimson (1978) makes what seems to be more extensive calculation and analysis,5 and makes the following revi-sions: Kuranko is added to the Mandekan complex; Mandekan is distinguished into two groups, “M1” and “M2”; four divisions of the Northern subgroup are made, whereas previously there were three. This report will follow Bim-son (1978) in his grouping for Mandekan languages. Therefore, the languages discussed will be: Mandinka, Xas-sonke, Maninka, Bambara, Dyula, Konyanka, Wassulunka, Diakhanka, Mauka, Bo (Marka), and Kuranko. (Bimson seems to have inadvertently left out Mandinka in his listing of Mandekan languages.)

Galtier (1981) makes the revision of including Susu (soussou) with Mandekan, based on his lexico-statistic calcu-lations. He also rearranges divisions of the Mande branch into NW Mande, SW Mande, and “Center” (his “Center Sub-group” being equivalent to the traditional Northern Mande). Galtier also wishes to take into account more fac-tors of language interaction and sociolinguistics, rather than be strictly limited to lexico-statistic calculations. In his article, he provides careful word studies across various Manding dialects. He also provides dialectological maps for the Manding dialects.

Galtier (1981) in general agrees with Long (1971a), yet wants to refine the internal classification of the Northern-Western division. Galtier points out that the strong influence of Malinke upon other dialects has biased the former classifications too much. Malinke has a very strong sociological effect, and many lexico-statistical similarities could

2Although Delafosse (1924) himself changes this classification scheme in his contribution to Meillet and Cohen (1952) Les Langues du Monde. 3Galtier (1981) divides the history of Mandé classification differently; as from 1901–1952 (characterized by Delafosse and Westermann) and

from 1953–1972 (Prost, Welmers, and Long). 4Long (1971a) specifies four categories of judgment: (1) identical, (2) cognate based on regular sound correspondence, (3) forms which are

“look-alikes” although not regular sound correspondence, and (4) not at all cognate. 5Bimson’s work benefits from much consultation with Welmers during the study, he providing the Southwestern Mande data.

7

be found comparing these languages with Malinke. But a proper comparison is not possible in a case where one lan-guage is very dominant, as the case is for Malinke.

Galtier therefore rearranges the classification of Long (1971a) by designating a “Central” subgroup which does not have either Bozo or Soninke, or Sembla or Samogo in it. This Central subgroup does contain Susu, although Galtier is reluctant to compare it with Manding languages because of Malinke’s strong influence. However, Kuranko is definitely not included with Mandekan, aligning with Long 1971a.

Figure 2 shows a comparison of the classifications for Welmers, Long, Bimson, and Galtier.

Welmers 1971 Northern Mande Susu-Yalunka Soninke Hwela-Numu

Ligbi Vai, Kono Khasonke Malinke-Bambara-Dyula

Long 1971a Northern Mande

Susu-Yalunka Mandekan Ligbi (Hwela-Numu) Mandinka Vai, Kono Xassonke Kuranko Maninka Samogo-Gouan Bambara Sembla Dyula Konyanka Wassulunka Diakhanka Mauka Bo (Marka)

Bimson 1978 Northern Mande Mandekan Hwela Kono Susu-Yalunka M1 M2 Xassonke Konyanka Maninka Wassulunka Bambara Diakhanka Dyula Mauka Bo (Marka) Kuranko

8

Figure 2. Mande classifications of Welmers, Long, Bimson, and Galtier

At this “lower” level of classification, for example 80 to 90 percent cognate percentages for the Mandekan lan-guages (Bimson 1978:64), there seem to be no serious classification problems. (However, see footnote 6 regarding the different approaches to grouping Manding languages.) What is of interest is the distinctiveness of the many sub-dialects falling within the eleven languages of the Manding complex. For Mali, Senegal, and Guinea Bissau, the most recent studies, which are quite comprehensive, are DNAFLA 1980, Balde 1981, and MAPE 1980, respectively. These dialects cover nine West Africa countries and represent approximately four to five million speakers (Platiel 1978). Interlanguage intelligibility is hard to measure due to the widespread use of trade languages such as Dyula (in Ivory Coast) and Bambara (in Mali). Further work in the area of Manding languages could be directed towards the sorting out of cognate percentages, degree of intelligibility, and bilingualism. All of these three factors are “high” within the Manding complex. More on this will be discussed in section 6.0, “Conclusion.”

4.0 Language Listings This section is a listing of dialects within each of the eleven Mandekan (Manding) language groups designated by

Bimson 1978. These are Bambara, Dyula, Diakhanka, Konyanka, Kuranko, Mandinka, Maninka, Marka, Mauka, Wassulunka, and Xassonke. Maps will be provided denoting general areas of these language groups. Data seemed to be more plentiful in some areas, such as for dialects in Ivory Coast and Mali, than in other areas. Most of the data found seemed to be of a strictly linguistic nature, with little in the way of sociolinguistic characterization.

It is useful here to note the work of Galtier (1981) which divides Manding languages into two major groups, East-ern Manding and Western Manding.6 This distinction, and further subgrouping of these two Eastern and Western divisions, are a basis for linguistic characterization according to dialect.

Figure 4.0 provides a general diagram of the scheme of Galtier 1981.

Figure 4.0 Basic divisions of Manding according to Galtier 1981

6Galtier 1981 (and Creissels, also) represents a significantly different approach—dialectology—than the strict lexicostatistic approach of the

work of Bimson 1978 and Long 1971a, for example. For this paper, I have relied upon both types of research in order to estimate the general ar-eas of the Manding languages, especially Bimson 1978, Creissels 1980a and 1980b, Derive 1981, Galtier 1981, and Long 1971a.

Galtier 1981 Division West

(a) Subgroup of North-West - Soninke - Bozo

(b) Subgroup of center - Susu, Jalonké - Manding - Kuranko - Kono, Vai - Ligbi, Hwela, Numu - Ble

Western Manding Eastern Manding

Mandinka (Bissau and Casamance)

Maninka (Kita, Mali)

Manenka (Guinea)

Wassulunka

Bambara (central Mali)

Dyula (Ivory Coast Upper Volta)

Xassonka Maninka

(E. Senegal) Diakhanka

9

4.1 Dyula Two Manding language groups are accounted for mainly in Ivory Coast, Dyula and Mauka. Dyula is much more

widespread. Those speakers of these two groups (approximately 776,000) comprise about 15 percent of the popula-tion (Kokora 1979). This number includes approximately 75,000 Mauka speakers.

Figure 4.1 provides a general map of the region where the languages are spoken (Dyula and Mauka). Dyula is a language which is very widespread, and it is a term which is used in different ways. It is not obvious nor

completely uniform how the term Dyula (dioula in French) is used. Four ways in which it is used are:

1. For speakers in the region of the sous-prefecture of Kong, in the area of Kong to Dabakala. This area is said to be the “origin” area, where speakers of Bambara (from Bamako, Mali) settled here in the thirteenth century. The administrative term Dyula, applies to this.

2. For the pervasive trade language, or “commercial Dyula” (tabusikan), widespread throughout Ivory Coast. It is said to be linguistically different from the Dyula of Kong (Frick and Bolli 1969). There are also tutorial materi-als in this Dyula (Dumestre 1981, Long and Diomande 1971).

3. For Manding dialects in Ivory Coast. (It is used in this way by Derive 1981). In this manner it would include Mauka; whereas for Bimson (1978) Mauka and Dyula are two separate dialects.

4. Similar to a designation like 3, this is used by speakers of Dyula outside Manding-speaking areas (Kokora 1979).

With respect to some usage of the term Dyula, Keita1979 points out that for Derive and Partmann, Dyula is a synonym for Manding. And for Delafosse, Dyula refers to one dialect of Mandekan. It is in this latter sense that re-cent studies from the Institut de Linguistique Appliquee in Abidjan that Dyula (dioula) is used (Keita 1971).

In addition, there are various areas outside of the main Ivory Coast areas, where Dyula is spoken. For example, there is a dialect known as Ble, (less than one thousand speakers) in a small area in Upper Volta, southwest of Ban-fora (Houis 1981). Also Dyula is known and used in some parts of Mali, although the dominant dialect in Mali is, of course, Bambara.

10

Figure 4.1. Region of Dyula and Mauka

11

4.2 Mauka In the region of Touba to Seguela, in west-central Ivory Coast, the Manding dialect is known as Mauka (or Maou,

maukakan). At least thirty to thirty-five thousand speakers are in this group. This adjacent Manding dialect immedi-ately to the west is Konyanka.

Gingiss (1873) has done a detailed study of this area and suggests that the Manding dialects in this area should be subdivided into three groups: (1) Mauka dialect, around Touba, (2) Koyaga dialect, around Mankano, and (3) Woro-dugan dialects around Seguela, to Worofla, to Kani. In his study he focuses on Worodugukan and compares this dia-lect with Maninka of Guinea (Faranah area), Mandinka of Gambia, Kuranko of Sierra Leone, Eastern Dyula (N.E. Ivory Coast), and trade Dyula. On the basis of his work he suggests a further Manding branching as follows:

Proto Manding

Proto-Koyaga Bambara Maninka E. Dyula

Worodugukan Maukak“n K“yagakan

When talking about Dyula and Mauka, it is helpful to mention the article by Derive (1981) on dialect variations

with respect to marques predicatifs. Derive discusses this aspect for twenty-three dialects of Manding languages in Ivory Coast. The areas covered by this study are reflected in figure 4.2 (taken from Derive 1981).

Figure 4.2. Dyula dialects studied by Derive (1981)

12

4.3 Bambara Bambara is probably the most widespread, dominant language in West Africa. It is the principal language of Mali

and is a second language for many. An estimate of the number of speakers is 1.5 million (Platiel 1978). Those who understand some Bambara are between four and five million. Bambara speakers call themselves banmana, and their language bamanakan. The general region of Bambara (see figure 4.3) is from Djenne, to Segou, to Bamako (the ac-knowledged center of the language); north to Kaarta region (150 kilometers east of Bafoulabe). There is also a Bam-bara dialect in eastern Senegal. There is also a “trade” version of Bambara, having a similar role in Mali as Dyula has in Ivory Coast. There is a “standard” version of Bambara, which Radio Mali uses, as well as established primers, orthography, newspapers, adult literacy, lexiques, dictionaries, and many guides for Bambara instruction. There is a Bible (1961), and much technical work has been carried out, notably by Charles Bird and also by Maurice Houis.

Figure 4.3. Region of Bambara

13

4.4 Marka Marka is a Manding dialect in the region of the Upper Volta-Mali border, in a northwesterly direction from De-

gougou, Upper Volta. Platiel (1978) estimates a population of 320,000. Marka is also known as Dafing, and as Bô. Marka speakers are sometimes called soninkes by Bambaras, but Soninke is not in the Manding group of languages. Figure 4.4 shows the general area of this dialect.

Figure 4.4. Region of Marka

14

4.5 Konyanka In Guinea, in the region of Beyla to the Ivory Coast Border, the Konyanka dialect of Manding is known. There are

approximately 70,000 speakers (Platiel 1978) of this dialect. I have not been able to find much information on this dialect of Manding. Maninka (section 4.7) is the dominant Manding dialect in Guinea and received much more at-tention. The estimated region of Konyanka is indicated in Figure 4.5.

Figure 4.5. Region of Konyanka

15

4.6 Wassulunka Wassalunka is a dialect which is estimated to be spoke by 150,000 people, in a region northeast of Kankan,

Guinea, and southwest of Bougouni, Mali.7 This means that it comprises an area generally around the intersection of Ivory Coast, Mali, and Guinea. It has been considered in the past quite close to Maninka of Guinea, although not much detailed study has been done in this area. Figure 4.6 shows the area of the Wassulunka dialect.

Figure 4.6. Region of Wassulunka

7Platiel (1978) notes that there are some speakers of Wassulanka in Senegal.

16

4.7 Maninka Maninka is the term for the Manding dialect in northern Guinea and also extending into Liberia. It is a quite domi-

nant language of Guinea, adopted by the government for use on radio, an official orthography, and literacy program for adults. It is a second language for many. (However, the linguistic appropriateness of this use or dialectal adapta-tions is unknown.) Reported numbers of speakers are not very studied, but estimates are 100,000 for Guinea and 64,000 for Sierra Leone (Grimes 1978). Figure 4.7 provides a geographical estimate of the areas pertaining to Maninka (roughly an area defined by Kankan, to Fraanah, to Dinguiraye). It is known as manenakanori-kan west of Kankan.

Figure 4.7. Region of Maninka

17

4.8 Mandinka Mandinka is the term applied to Manding dialects in Senegal, Gambia, and Guinea Bissau (approximately 500,000

speakers). Mandinka is known throughout the Gambia; in Senegal south of the Gambia, the region of Casamance (generally area of Sedhiou, Marassoum); and also in the southeastern quarter of Senegal. (In the southeast of Sene-gal, Maninka is also present, as well as some Bambara.) There is radio use of Mandinka and an official alphabet (Tera 1979). It is a major language of the Gambia, and enjoys cultural prestige. Mandinka is spoken in the eastern part of Guinea Bissau, but has not been very studied there. However, in Senegal and in Gambia there has been con-siderable language research on Mandinka by Houis, Coulibaly, Bird, Creissels to name a few. Through the efforts of IFAN, there has been an orthographic system done for Bambara, which is the focus of harmonization efforts (Di-agne, in UNESCO 1978). Figure 4.8 shows the general areas for the Mandinka dialect.

Figure 4.8. Region of Mandinka

18

4.9 Xassonke Xassonke is the dialect of Manding spoken generally in the area west of Kayes (very near the Senegal border, and

towards Bafoulabé, southeasterly direction. About 110,000 speakers are estimated of this group (Platiel 1978). Speakers are called khassonkakano. Figure 4.9 provides a map for this region of Xassonke.

Figure 4.9. Region of Xassonke

19

4.10 Diakhanka This dialect has been associated by some with Soninke, but Bimson (1978) lexicostatistically places it in the

Manding complex. Bimson’s data is taken from Long’s word lists, based on the dialect in Touba, in northwest Guinea. The region of the Diakhanka dialect of Manding is in the area of Touba, northwest Guinea to Kedougou, Senegal (SE). See figure 4.10.

Figure 4.10. Region of Diakhanka

20

4.11 Kurano Kuranko is a Manding dialect which is generally in the northeast corner of Sierra Leone. It is highly mutual intel-

ligible with Maninka, but detailed dialect studies have not been done. The number of speakers is reported to be ap-proximately 180,000, in Sierra Leone, and south of Dabola, Guinea (Platiel 1978). Figure 4.11 shows a rough area of location of the Kuranko dialect. Some villages which Kuranko is spoken in are Yiffin, Sefodu, Kabala, Ko-romonto, and Bodala (in Sierra Leone).

Figure 4.11. Region of Kuranko

21

5.0 Linguistic Characteristics This section will briefly discuss the linguistic features of Manding languages, in two parts: (5.1) Phonological

Characteristics and (5.2) Grammatical Characteristics. Recent dialectology studies by Creissels (1980a, 1980b) and Galtier (1981) have been done, which are very good for comparisons among Manding dialects. This section will util-ize information from these works in dealing with characteristics of Manding languages.

5.1 Phonological Characteristics Phonological aspects of Manding languages have been described by Creissels (1980a) in terms of choosing two

dialects, Bambara and Mandinka, and comparing these. Bambara represents the “eastern” Manding group, and Mandinka represents the “western” Manding group. A rough partition may be considered by a vertical line through Kita, Mali, distinguishing the eastern from western dialects. (See figure 4.0 for the scheme of Galtier (1981) to sub-divide Manding dialects into eastern and western.)

The vowel systems of Bambara and Mandinka are shown in figure 5.1. Bambara i u u e o e o a a

Mandinka i u ii uu e o ee oo a aa

Figure 5.1. Vowels of Bambara and Mandinka

Three major differences are evident: number of vowels, nasalization in Bambara, and vowel length in Mandinka. In addition, there is a frequent correspondence of the Bambara mid vowels e and o, with the Mandinka high vowels i and u: see table 5.1 for examples (from Creissels 1980a).

Table 5.1

Bambara Mandinka bolo bulu ‘main’ se sii ‘atteindre’

There are many other relationships and phonological rules with respect to the vowel systems, but just a brief sketch of the phonology characteristics will be provided here.

Syllable structure between Bambara and Mandinka provides additional information on the two-vowel systems, noted by open syllables and closed syllables (typically a nasal). Examples are shown in table 5.2.

Table 5.2

Bambara Mandinka f f ‘noir’ de d ‘enfant’

22

In this relationship, phonological coalescence of the vowel plus nasal of Mandinka historically resulted in the na-salized vowels of the eastern dialect (Creissels 1980a:9). However, there is not consistent or absolute occurrence of a nasal consonant in Mandinka corresponding to a nasalized vowel: see table 5.3 for examples.

Table 5.3

Bambara Mandinka yafa yamfa ‘pardonner’ mafa maaka ‘bruit’

Creissels notes considerable variations among dialects that would otherwise seem close (1980a:10). The long vowels of Mandinka reflect the loss of an intervocalic velar consonant (a natural, weakening process), a

mechanism apparent in some fluctuations in Bambara. Examples are given in table 5.4.

Table 5.4 Bambara Mandinka s si ‘s’asseoir’ taa ~ ta ~ taa taa ‘partir’

In other eastern Manding dialects, such as Worodugu (Gingiss 1973, Keita 1976), other phonological innovations

can be found in certain environments, showing different dialectal evolutions. Table 5.5 shows examples for semi-vowel formation and phonemic front rounded vowels.

Table 5.5

Bambara Worodugu kli ky ‘oeuf’ suru su ‘court’

For the consonant system of Manding languages, the examples of Bambara and Mandinka may be again used as

representing eastern and western dialects. Figure 5.2 show the consonant phonemes of Bambara and Mandinka.

Bambara (p) t c k b d j m n h f s ( ) (z) l r y w

Mandinka

(p) t c k b d j m n n h f s l r y w

Figure 5.2. Consonants of Bambara and Mandinka

23

The parenthesized phonemes in the charts indicate the absence of full phonemic status. For p, in both dialects, it is more present now because of borrowings; it is only really characteristic with respect to ideophones. Also, h is a bor-rowing from Arabic. In Bambara, š and z reflect process of palatalization and voicing. Creissels (1980a) notes the gradual dialectal variations, for instance, with voicing adjacent to nasals. As one goes southeastward from Gambia to Ivory Coast, conditional voicing of s becomes more and more frequent. In Mandinka, z is entirely unknown, whereas in Bambara z is very evident.

The consonant systems of Manding languages are often discussed in terms of variation with respect to position in a word. Word initial and intervocalic positions are straightforward to compare in the typical CVCV patterns, or the reduced patterns of CV:, and C-semiV-V. (The latter is especially frequent in the eastern Manding dialects of Bam-bara and Dyula.) Examples of various alternations are given in tables 5.6 and 5.7. (Examples from Galtier 1981.)

Table 5.6. Word initial consonant alternation in Manding languages

W. Manding E. Manding Mandinka

(Gambia) Mandεnka (Guinea)

Bambara (Mali)

Dyula Ivory Coast

Kuranko

k ~ s ‘attacher’ sìti sìdi sìri — kiri t ~ c ‘milieu’ te: t c c — l ~ d ‘se coucher’ dá lá lá lá sa

24

Table 5.7 Some intervocalic consonant alternations in Manding languages

W. Manding E. Manding Md Mn Xs Mnn Bm Dy t ~ d ~ r ‘attacher’ siti sidi siri siri si: l ~ r ~ ‘lourd’ kuli gili xuìi gbili giri gbiri kuli gili gbili guri gbili guri gbi: r ~ l ~ w ‘courir’ bori bori boli Boli bari Bori bwe l ~ r ‘soleil’ tili tili tele tle tilo: kle tele tere tle te: ~ ~ w ‘sel’ ko: koko xoxo kçkç kçkç kogo xoxo: kçgç kçgç kçga kç ç kç ç kç a kç: kç: kç: kwa kwç Abbreviations: Md – Mandinka of Gambia; Mn – Maninka of Kita; Xs – Xassonke; Mnn – Mannka of Guinea; Bm – Bambara; Dy – Dyula.

Tone systems Tone in Manding languages is important although in the history of the studies, it has not always been attended to;

such as Delafosse’s mention of tone not being an important factor in Dyula. Also, not a few tutorial works and dic-tionaries have words with no tone marking. But in recent years, tone has been well studied, such as by Welmers, Spears, and Bird.

Manding languages have the feature of terrace tone, with varying degrees of intervals. Tone provides contrast in lexical items (e.g., bágà ‘cooked rice’ and bàgà ‘poison’), and also serves grammatical distinguishing function. There are many tonal processes which distinguish different dialects, which are not always straightforward to figure out. Braconnier (1982) proposes an analysis of tonal inversion for the Odienné dialect of Dyula. Dyula dialects seem to have been elusive as to a clear understanding of all the functions.

Grammatical Characteristics Grammar of the Manding languages will be discussed with reference to the noun phrase, the verb phrase, and the

sentence. Studies of Manding language by French researchers (such as Houis, Creissels), however, tend to be func-tionally oriented, dealing with systems of grammatical constructions (such as système des modalités nominales, syn-tagme complétif, and predication verbale. See, for example, Creissels (1980) for a thorough systematic, functional analysis of Manding grammar, with respect to dialectological groupings.

25

The noun phrase can be as the subject or direct object of the sentence, and also can fill the object of a postposition. Manding typically uses postpositions. An example is: musa f ‘near Musa’. The location of the noun phrase as sub-ject, or object, is either before a tense/aspect marker or between a tense/aspect marker and a verb. The noun phrase has the option of being either definite or indefinite. The definite form is indicated by suffixation of a vowel, -o. This morpheme is the final one in a noun phrase. The indefinite form is an unbound marker, as in muso y yan ‘there is some woman here’. An interesting feature between dialects is the representation of the definite form by tone only, in Bambara and Maninka, for instance. In Mandinka and Kuranko, there is the presence of a suffixed segment. Other suffixation marks the plural, usually la, or something similar.

The noun phrase in its simplest form has no adjectives or suffixes. Noun phrases can be more complex, such as with genitives or in compounds. Adjectives and qualifiers usually go between a noun phrase and its definite marker.

There is also a distinction between alienable and inalienable possession in a noun phrase, which is present in Manding dialects. It usually has the vowel a with a preceding stop or liquid. (For example, ka in Bambara, and la in Mandinka). The noun phrase can be more complex, but only a brief sketch is provided here. Creissels (1980a, 1980b) and Houis (1980) have done extensive work on Manding dialect comparisons. The verb phrase in Manding languages are generally of two types, transitive and intransitive. The object is pre-verbal in transitive constructions, as in a b ‘it remove’. A postpositional phrase may also be a complement in verb phrase structure. There are definite cooccurence constraints on the construction of verb and postpositional phrase. These must be as selectional restric-tions provided in the lexicon. There is a special type of verb phrase with the nominalizing morpheme –li, and k, ‘to do’. The construction appears to be transitive in its form (e.g., n ye tabi k ‘I past cooking do’, Gingiss 1973:71), but is actually intransitive semantically. There are certain distribution differences of the tense/aspect markers in the Manding dialects, but generally the construction of verb phrases is very similar.

In Manding dialects, sentence structures are also similar, making up about eight types. These types are: identifica-tional, existential, imperative, locative, durative, intransitive, adjective, and common sentence type. Gingiss (1973) provides many examples and comparisons of Manding languages, which tend not to differ widely in sentence con-struction.

6.0 Conclusion As was noted in section 3.0, the languages within the Manding group tend to have a high degree of cognation and

inter-language intelligibility. Bilingualism in at least the dominant languages of Dyula and Bambara add much bi-lingualism to the picture. People depend on these trade languages for market usage. In Mali, Bambara is broadcast on the radio, taught in schools, and used in government offices (Tera 1979).8 As Platiel (1978:44) notes, the linguis-tic realities change because of population migrations and media use of dominant dialects (such as Bambara). She cites, for example, Bozo, Ligbi, Numu, and Soninke as showing serious linguistic change. Such influences are espe-cially strong in Mali, northwest Ivory Coast, and western Upper Volta.

However, people who tend to stay in remote village areas without much travel to larger towns are not so bilingual, and intelligibility may be quite lower in these areas.9 With much linguistic similarity and degree of bilingualism, surveys such as Bolli et al. (1972) are helpful in providing more detail regarding intelligibility between many vil-lages in a region.

An additional need is evaluation of appropriateness of literature available, often in the dominant dialect. In Bam-bara of Mali, and in Maninka of Guinea, for example, there is both a Bible and other literature, as well as the lan-guages being chosen as “official” (Bambara being much more developed than Maninka). Yet, the degree to which this literature really communicates to remote villages and dialects is unknown. To both religious and government bodies it does seem appealing to be able to enable one dialect, with a normalized orthography, to reach many Mand-ing speakers in West Africa; even to the point of widespread inter-country cooperation (see, for example UNESCO 1978 and UNESCO 1979). Yet, what may be produced is a third, synthetic language which people have to learn in addition to their own and the trade language. Without the necessary linguistic study and sociolinguistic (generally very lacking) study, it seems to me that the really effective widespread application of dominant dialects remains an untested ambition. Language samples from various villages would be helpful, of course, and the DNAFLA 1980 sur-vey in Mali contributes much toward such information.

8Tera (1979) contains an excellent overview of the status and usage of Manding languages in West Africa. 9See Campbell (1972) for evidence of this in the area of Touba, Ivory Coast, concerning the Maou (Mauka) language. Also Anderson (1982),

surveying “Malinké” (probably Xassonke or Mandinka) indicates similar village characteristics of being weak in Mandinka and Bambara.

26

Linguistic assessment and intelligibility studies can be done as more and more groups of villages are researched. Intelligibility studies have been done both on the basis of linguistic data (that is, word lists) using an appropriate fac-tor (a fraction less than 1.0) applied to cognate data (for example, Welmers 1957). Or, dialect test tapes of auto-biographical discourse, with content questions for the hearer being tested, have also been used for estimation of mu-tual intelligibility between dialects (Casad 1974).10 Some areas where such studies have been applied in a thorough manner are in the northern part of Ivory Coast, in the Senufo region around Korhogo (Welmers 1957), and around the Ivory Coast-Upper Volta border (Groff and Solomiac 1982). After such analysis, what remains is appropriate planning and personnel strategy for a language area. Welmers (1957) represents an example of an analysis-strategy sequence for the Senufo languages around Korhogo.11

In consideration, then, of linguistic samples and whether a literature from one dialect can be used in another, sometimes simple word lists and cognate percentages may not be the only criteria.12 Bimson (1978:300) points out that grammatical structure may be quite different.13 In the case he notes the question particle of Maninka, Bambara, and Kuranko share similarities (ba, wà, and wa, respectively). Whereas Kono and Vai, with which Kuranko has been traditionally grouped, do not have these. Kono and Vai mark questions by a special question intonation. The point of this is that grammatical features also play an important role in figuring “mutual intelligibility.” Bimson cites five other significant grammatical differences14 which go to show the legitimacy of placing Kuranko within the Mandekan group and not with Kono and Vai (as Long 1971 had done by cognate studies).

Bird (1968) points out that with respect to relative clauses, the Bambara (of the region from Bamako to Segou) dif-fers significantly from the Maninka spoken in the region of Kita. The differences are within the system of apposi-tional and adjunctive relative clauses. (Both types are present in Mandekan group.) The interesting thing in the differences (between Bambara and Maninka) is that the Maninka speakers have an obligatory rule of shifting the ap-positional relative clause to the rear (being the more conservative dialect). Whereas, in Bambara, constraints at the level of stylistic preference determine the shift of the relative clause, not an obligatory rule as in Maninka. Bird fur-ther points out that much of the Bambara used on Radio Mali, for instance, is translated from French. Therefore, the constraints of obligatory rear-shifting of the relative clause are relaxed in the Bambara, being the less conservative dialect. This implicates a grammatical difference which could have a bearing on, say, rejection of certain structures by native Maninka speakers.

Also helpful in evaluating inter-dialect intelligibility is sociolinguistic interviewing, which should not be underes-timated. It is not unusual to find that sociolinguistic impressions indeed corroborate and enhance intelligibility test results (see Campbell 1972, Groff and Solomiac 1982). Bendor-Samuel (1980, 1982) has discussed sociolinguistic factors and also approaching the question of using linguistic relationships together with sociolinguistic factors to try to predict comprehension. Typically, linguistic factors can only indicate a lack of comprehension, and not predict adequate comprehension.

In conclusion, there is much that remains to be done—linguistically, sociolinguistically, and assessment of needs for indigenous literature. There are over two thousand languages spoken in Africa, and work can always be adduced in linguistic research, teaching of languages, and production of literature. Dwyer and Irish (1982) of Michigan State University have begun a language resource project with the aim of a handbook of human, institutional, and material resources for the teaching and learning of African languages.

It will be interesting to see what the next decades bring regarding the recognition, study, and promotion of the var-ied and valuable resources of African ethnic groups and languages.

10This is the method often used by members of the Summer Institute of Linguistics and the Société International de Linguistique. 11Welmer’s report is a good case of linguistic assessment based on lexico-statistic data and estimation of mutual intelligibility. Then, personnel

strategy according to dialect similarities, language-learning consideration, and development of indigenous literature is discussed in order to cover this language of 450,000 speakers and a dozen or so dialects.

12Mutual intelligibility is a frequently used testing method, but bilingualism is not an easy matter to sort out from strictly linguistic intelligibil-ity. As a first step, the story method (Casad 1974) and Mutual Intelligibility Factor (2/3 of cognate point) have been used a lot.

13For an example of differences in the phonological level between dialects, and implication for a different literature, see Gingiss (1973) and Campbell (1972) concerning Mauka.

14These cases were concerning identifier morphemes, future construction, affirmative construction, past transitive construction, and negative construction.

27

References This section is a collection of source listing which are related to Manding languages, along with some references

of wider interest (such as Mande, African languages in general, and sociolinguistics). It is not exhaustive,15 but pur-pose of this collection is to provide an idea of what has been done and who has done the work in Manding lan-guages.

This section of references in composed of eight subsections, following a list of abbreviations which may be used in the listings.

List of abbreviations ACCT Agence de coopération culturelle et technique L’AELIA Association d’études linguistiques interculturelles africaines AGECOOP Agence de coopération culturelle et technique CEPLAN Centre d’études interethniques et interculturelles CILF Conseil International de la Langue Française CIRL Cahiers Ivoiriens de Recherche Linguistique CLAD Centre de Linguistique Appliqée de Dakar CNRS Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique DAFS Département d’Alphabétisation Fonctionnelle et Sélective DNAFLA Direction Nationale de l’Alphabétisation Fonctionnelle et de la Linguistique Appliquée L’ENLOV Ecole Nationale des Langues Orientales Vivantes GRTO Groupe de Recherche et Tradition orale ILA Institut de Linguistique Appliquée IFAN Institut français/fondamental d’Afrique noire (Dakar) BIFAN Bulletin de l’Institut fondamental d’Afrique noire (Dakar) MAPE Projet Mandingue-Peulh l’INLCO Institut national des Langues et Civilisations Orientales ORSTOM Office de la Recherche Scientifique et Technique Outre-Mer SELAF Société d’Etudes Linguistiques et Anthropologiques de France SLA Section de Linguistique Appliquée de l’Université de Yaoundé SLAO Société linguistique de l’Afrique occidentale SOAS School of Oriental and African Studies (London) SLLR Sierra Leone Language Review UNESCO United Nations Education, Social, and Cultural Organization

15See DNAFLA 1982, MAPE (Manding-Peul project) bibliography which is a thorough work covering Manding languages.

28

Dyula

Dyula: Technical linguistic Braconnier, C. 1980. Enquête dialectologique du dioula de Côte-d’Ivoire et du Wojenka. Rapport MAPE no. 5.

Abidjan: ILA, Université d’Abidjan. Braconnier, C. 1982. le système tonal du dioula d’Odienné. Abidjan: ILA, Université d’Abidjan. Calvet, L. J. 1970. Arbitraire du signe et langues en contact: les systèmes de numération en bambara, dioula et ma-

linké. La Linguistique 6(2):119–123. Coulibaly, B. 1975. Pour une transcription practique des tons du Jula. Ouagadougou: Annales CLU. Creissels, Denis. 1982. Note de lecture: une contribution à l’étude du jula de Côte-d’Ivoire. Mandenkan 4 (automne

1982):103–108. Derive, M. J. 1976. Dioula véhiculaire, dioula de Kong et dioula d’Odienné. Annales de l’Université d’Abidjan (sé-

rie H) 9(1):55–85. Dumestre, Gerard. 1970a. Eléments de grammaire dioula. Abidjan: ILA, Université d’Abidjan. Dumestre, Gerard. 1970b. Lexèmes simples, dérivés et integrés dans le dioula véhiculaire de Côte-d’Ivoire. 9ème

congrès langues de l’Afrique Occidentale; Freetown. Abidjan: ILA. Dumestre, Gerard. 1971. Catégories grammaticales en dioula de Côte-d’Ivoire: nom, verbe, adjectif. Annales de

l’Université d’Abidjan (série H) 4(1):51–61. Dumestre, Gerard. 1981. Idéophones et adverbs expressifs en bambara. Afrique et Language No. 15 – 1er semester,

20–30. Dumestre, Gerard. 1982. Remarques à propos de l’usage des adverbes expressifs en bambara. Afrique et Language

No. 17 – 1er semester, 5–11. Dumestre, Gerard. nd. Les mot essentiels du dioula véhiculaire de Côte-d’Ivoire. nl: np. Flik, Eva, et Bolli, Margrit. 1971. Mandinké, Dyula. Annales de l’Université d’Abidjan. Vol. 1. Gingiss, P. 1972. A Dyula Socio-linguistic Perspective. Londres: Groupes d’études Mandingues. Maire, John. 1980. Enquête dialectologique du dioula de Côte-d’Ivoire et du dioula de Kong: comparaison lexicale.

(Rapport MAPE No. 4) Abidjan: ILA, Université d’Abidjan. Mohlig, W. 1978. Contribution à l’analyse prosodologique du dioula. ERA 248 CNRS – INLCO ORCEMONT

2:54–74. Partman, G. 1973. Le dioula véhiculaire en Côte-d’Ivoire. Etude comparative des jeunes locuteurs primaires et sec-

ondaires du dioula. Ann Arbor: University Microfilms. Partman, G. 1974. Derivation and simplification by adolescent dioula speakers. Studies in African Linguistics

5(1):101–115. Partman, G. 1975. Quelques remarques sur le dioula véhiculaire en Côte-d’Ivoire. Annales de l’Université

d’Abidjan (série H) 8(1):41–261. Stahlke, Herbert. 1976. Segment sequences and segmental fusion (Bambara taken as a base). Studies in African Lin-

guistics 7(1). Tera, Kalilou. 1978. Innovation lexicale en Bambara. Bamako, Mali: Centre pédogogique supérieur.

Tutorial material Derive, M. J. and M. Bamba. 1978 Additif à Kó Dì, Cours de Dioula. Abidjan: ILA, Université d’Abidjan. Dumestre, G. 1971. Cours de dioula à l’usage des volontaires du corps de la paix. Abidjan: np. Dumestre, G. 1981. Kó dì, Cours de dioula. (Revision of 1974 edition) Abidjan: Université d’Abidjan., Les Nou-

velles Editions Africaines. Dumestre, G. and G. Retord. 1972. Dioula – cours audio-oral unité 1. 10th West Africa Linguistic Society Congress,

Accra, Ghana. Long, R. W. et R. S. Diomandé. 1968. Basic Dyula; grammatical outline and introductory exercises. Bloomington:

Indiana University.

Dictionaries, lexiques Braconnier, C. and S. Diaby. 1982. Dioula d’Odienné (parler de Samatiguila): Materiel Lexical. Abidjan: ILA, Uni-

versité d’Abidjan. Derive, M. J. and C. Braconnier. 1978. Petit dictionnaire dioula. Abidjan: ILA, Université d’Abidjan.

29

Dumestre, G. 1974. Lexique fundamental du dioula de Côte-d’Ivoire. Abidjan: ILA, Université d’Abidjan. DAFS. 1979. Lexique de base jula. Commission des Langues, sous-commission du jula. Agence de Coopération

Culturelle et Technique. Haute-Volta. DAFS. 1979. Règles de transcription et lexique de base jula. Commission des Langues, sous-commission du jula.

Haute-Volta.

Bambara

Technical linguistic Bird, Charles S. 1965. Bambara tone and the specific marker. Proceeding of the Fifth West African Languages Con-

gress. Accra, Ghana. Bird, Charles S. 1966a. Determination in Bambara. Journal of West African Languages 3(1). Bird, Charles S. 1966b. Aspects of Bambara Syntax. Ann Arbor, Michigan: University Microfilms, Inc. Bird, Charles S. 1968. Relative clauses in Bambara. Journal of West African Languages 5(1):35–48. Bird, Charles S. 1972. The syntax and semantics of possession in Bambara. Communication au Congrès d’autes

Manding. Londres. Braconnier, C. 1982. Le système tonal du dioula d’Odienné. ILA, Université d’Abidjan. Brauner, Sigmund. n.d. Quelques remarques sur la tonologie de la langue bambara. Leipzig: Institut des Etudes Af-

ricaines, Université de Leipzig. Brauner, Sigmund. n.d. Est-ce qu’on peut parler d’un “futur immédiat” en bambara. Leipzig: Université de Leipzig. Courtenay, Karen. 1974. On the nature of the Bambara tone system. Studies in African Linguistics 5(3):303–323. Creissels, Denis. 1981a. Compléments et rectificatifs à l’article “A propos la tonologie du bambara” paru dans le

No. 9 d’Afrique et Language. Afrique et Language No. 15 – 1er semester, 59–65. Creissels, Denis. 1981b. L’étymologie des prédicatifs d’identification des parlers bambara et jula: yé et dò-dò-lò.

Mandenkan 1 (printemps 1981):3–10. Diakite, D. 1981. A propos du terme bambara “tánnifila”. Mandenkan 1 (printemps 1981):107–108. Dumestre, G. 1972. Syntagme complétif, qualificatif, et attribatif en bambara. Communication au Congrès d’études

manding. Londres. Dumestre, G. 1981a. La morphologie verbale en bambara. Mandenkan 2 (automne 1981):49–67. Dumestre, G. 1981b. n/w en bambara. Mandenkan 1 (printemps 1981):11–16. Dumestre, G. 1982. Relations entre propositions dans l’énoncé complexe en bambara. Mandenkan 4 (automne

1982):17–40. Dwyer, D. 1976. The analysis of Bambara polarization. Studies in African Linguistics. Supplement 6, in honor of

William E. Welmers, 27–38. Galtier, G. 1974. Le bambara de Tamaconda et l’unification de la langue mandingue. Bamako: Imprimerie

DNAFLA. Galtier, G. et Souleymane Kante. 1978. Le vocabulaire grammatical bambara. ERA 248CNRS-INLCO ORCE-

MONT 2:75–95. Houis, M. 1970. Problèmes de lexicographie en bambara. Bulletin de la Société de Linguistique de Paris 65(1):213–

227. Houis, M. 1981. Les schèmes d’énoncés en bambara. Mandenkan 1 (printemps 1981):17–24. Magassa, H. 1975. Contribution à la morphosyntaxe du bambara: de la segmentation. Etudes Maliennes 15:11–18. Paques, Viviana. 1954. Les Bambara. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France. Samessekou, Adama. 1981. Eléments de morphologie verbale du bambara. Afrique et Langage 16 (2e semestre):67–

73. Toure, Amadou. 1976. A propos de la théorie des interférences: l’apprentissage du français par l’enfant bambara.

Paper from the twelfth congress of SLAO (Société linguistique de l’Afrique occidentale), Nigeria. Toure, Amadou. 1977. La grammaire de phrases bambaras à complément prédicatif. Annales de l’Université

d’Abidjan. (serie H) 10:113–175. Toure, Amadou. n.d. Les postulats de sens en bambara. Paper delivered at eleventh Congress de la Société linguis-

tique de l’Afrique Occidentale, Yaoundé. Zahan, Dominique. 1963. La dialectologie du verbe chez les Bambara. La Hague: Mouton.

30

Tutorial material Bailleul, Charles. 1977. Cours pratique de bambara. Bobo-Dioulosso: La Savane. Diarra, Florentin et Fr. M. Traore. n.d. Un peu de bambara sans beaucoup de peine. nl: np. Houis, Maurice. 1970. Phrases bambara (les types d’énoncé), Afrique et Language 1 (série pédagogie). Long, Ronald W. and K. Mamadou. 1971. Basic Bambara. Bloomington: Indiana University. La Mission Evangélique. 1947. Phrase book, Bambara-English. Kankan: la Mission Evangélique. Molin, Mgr. 1956. Grammaire Bambara. Issy-les-Moulineaux: Les Presses Missionnaires. Sauvant, F. 1925. Manuel bambara: grammaire et lexique (third revision of 1905 edition). Alger: np. Sauvant, Mgr. 1942. Manuel bambara. Alger: Maison-Carrée (Alger) Mission d’Afrique des Pères Blancs. na. 1978. Livre de phrases bambaras. Bamako: Centre de Littérature Evangélique. na. n.d. The new Bambara grammar. Bamako, Mali: Centre de Littérature Evangélique.

Dictionnaries, lexiques, orthography Bailleul, Charles and N. Kulubali. 1973. Lexique bambara-français, syllabique et tonal. Falaje: np. Bailleul, Charles and N. Kulubali. 1981. Petit dictionnaire bambara-français français-bambara. England: Avebury. Bazin, H. 1906. Dictionnaire Bambara-Français précédé d’un abrégé de grammaire bambara. Paris: Imprimerie na-

tionale. Dumestre, Gérard. 1983. Dictionnaire Bambara-Français (D), Fascicule 2. Paris: l’INALCO. Houis, Maurice. 1969. Documents lexicaux en bambara. Lyon: Afrique et Language 6. Molin, Mgr. 1955. Dictionnaire Bambara-Français. Presses missionaires, Iss-les-Moulineaux. (Seine). Sauvant, Mgr. 1926. Dictionnaire bambara-français et français-bambara. Alger: Maison-Carrée (Missions d’Afrique

des Pères Blancs). Travele, Moussa 1913. Petit dictionnaire bambara-français et français-bambara. Paris: Librairie Paul Geuthner. DNAFLA. 1968. Lexique bambara à l’usage des centres d’alphabétisation. DNAFLA. 1976. Orthographe et lexique du bambara. Bamako, Mali: Imprimerie DNAFLA. DNAFLA. 1979. Guide de transcription et de lecture du bambara. Bamako, Mali: Imprimerie DNAFLA. DNAFLA. n.d. Grammaire de la phrase bambara. Bamako: Imprimerie DNAFLA.

Manding (Malinké)

Dictionaries, tutorial material Abiven, R. P. 1906. Dictionnaire français-malinké et malinké-français, précédé d’un abrégé de grammaire malinké.

Conakry. np. Diagne, Pathé. 1978 (ed). Manual de conversation Wolof/Manding/Pulaar français-anglais. Dakar: Librairie

Sankore. Tautain. 1887. Notes sur les trios langues soninké, bambara, malinké. nl. Revue de linguistique et de physiologie

comparées. na. 1906. Essai de dictionnaire pratique français-malinké, and dictionnaire français-malinké.

Orthography, literacy national policies Belloncle, G. 1978. Une voie nouvelle pour l’élévation au Mali: la formation “supérieure” des jeunes alphabétisés.

ERA 246 CNRS-INLCO ORCEMONT, vol 2, 3–37. Camara, E. 1978. Notes sur l’orthographe du bambara. ERA 246 CNRS-INLCO ORCEMONTl 7:98–117. Diarra, Boubacar. 1973. Propositions pour une meilleure orthographe du Bambara. Etudes Maliennes no. 6. Diarra, A. 1978. L’alphabétisation en langue maternelle d’un groupe de travailleurs immigrés de l’agglomération

rouennaise: l’example soninké. ERA 248 CNRS-INLCO, vol 2, 44–53. Galtier, Gérard. 1974. Propositions pour une unification et une amélioration de l’orthographe de la langue mandin-

gue. Bamako: DNAFLA. Galtier, Gérard. 1978. Problèmes actuels de la transcription du bambara (ou mandingue). L’harmonisation interéta-

tique, les tons, la segmentation. ERA 248 CNRS-INLCO ORCEMONT 1978 1:35–73. Houis, Maurice. 1966. Propositions d’orthographe pour une langue manding. Bamako, Mali: np. UNESCO. 1978. Documents de la réunion d’experts sur la transcription et l’harmonisation des langues africaines.

Paris: UNESCO.

31

UNESCO. 1979. Documents de la réunion d’experts sur la utilization des langues africaines régionales ou sous-régionales comme véhicule de culture et moyens de communications dans le continent. Paris: UNESCO.

Literature Kibaru. Monthly newspaper in Bambara, published in Mali. Le Nouveau Testament en malinké (maninka) (an mari ni an kisibaga Yesu Christa Lanyiri kura). 1976. Guinea. So-

ciétés Bibliques en Afrique Occidentale.

General articles Bird, Charles S. 1970. The development of Mandekan (Manding): A study of the role of extra-llinguistic factors in

linguistic change. Language and History in Africa, David Dalby, 146–159. London: Frank Cass and Co. Coulibaly, Bakary. 1974. Pour une transcription des tons du manding. Communication au XIe congrés de la SLAO,

Yaoundé. Creissels, Denis. 1980a. Introduction à l’étude dialecotolgique des parlers Manding. Cours pour le certificat de la

maîtrise de linguistique. Université du Langues et Lettres de Grenoble. Creissels, Denis. 1980b. Variations dialectales dans les systèmes de marques prédicatives des parlers manding.

Communication au Colloque de dialectologie africaine. Ivry, juin 1980. Dalby, David. 1971. Distribution and nomenclalture of the Manding people and their languages. Papers on the

Manding, ed. by Carlton T. Hodge, 1–14. Bloomington: Indiana University. Delafosse, Maurice. 1901. Essai de manuel pratique de la langue mandé ou mandingue. Paris: Ernest Leroux. Delafosse, Maurice. 1924. Les langues du Soudan et de la Guinée. Les langues du monde, ed. by A. Meillet et M.

Cohen, 463–560. Paris. np. Delafosse, Maurice. 1955. Dictionnaire mandingue-français (2e volume du la langue manding et ses dialectes- ma-

linké, bambara, dioula). Paris: Librairie Orientaliste Paul Geuthner. Dumestre, Gérard. 1975a. A propos de l’orthographe des tons en manding. Annales de l’Université d’Abidjan (série

H) 8(1):27–34. Dumestre, Gérard. 1975b. L orthographe du mandingue. Annales de l’Université d’Abidjan (série H) 8. Galtier, Gérard. 1981. Problèmes dialectologiques et phonographématiques des parlers mandingues. Mandenkan 1

(Printemps 1981):39–58. Houis, Maurice. 1967. Les catégories de noms dérivés dans un parler manding. La classification nominale dans les

langues négro-africaines. Paris: Centre national de la recherche scientifique. Houis, Maurice. 1980a. Quelques faits de dialectologie mandingue. Paris: AGECOOP. Houis, Maurice. 1980b. Quelques faits de dialectologie mandingue. Eléments de recherche sur les langues afri-

caines, ed. by ACCT, 75–90. Paris: ACCT. Labouret, Henri. 1933. Quelques observations sur la alngue mandingue par H. Labouret et I. C. Ward. Africa 6(1),

38–50. Labouret, Henri. 1934. Les Manding et leur langue (2e partie la langue manding). Bulletin du Comité d’études histo-

riques et scientifiques de l’Afrique occidentale française 17(1):147–270. Spears, R. 1972. A typology of locative structures in Manding languages. Communicative au congrès d’études

Manding. London: School of Oriental and African Studies. Tera, Kalilou. 1979. Le manding: situations et usages officiels. Documents de la reunion d’experts sur l’utilisation

des langues africaines régionales ou sous-régionales comme véhicule de culture et moyen de communication dans le continent, 119–123. Bamako: UNESCO.

Material done with respect to one country, by country Gambia

Creissels, Denis. 1978. Le problème des adjectifs dans un parler manding de la Gambie. Paris: CNRS, 3–18. Jaffa, S. 1978. A propos de la définition d’une orthographe pour le mandingue de Gambie. ERA 246 CNRS-INLCO

ORCEMONT 1:87–108.

Guineau-Bissau MAPE. 1980. La langue mandingue et son parler en Guinée-Bissau. Bissau.

32

Ivory Coast Braconnier, C. 1982. Note sur certaines indications tonales données dans l’article de M. J. Derive: Variations dialec-

tales de certaines marques prédicatives des parlers manding ivoiriens (Mandenkan 1 et 2). Mandenkan 4 (Automne 1982):99–101.

Campbell, Neil. 1972. Maou survey report (Abidjan). ms. Derive, M. J. 1981. Variations dialectales de certaines marques prédicatives des parlers manding ivoiriens. Man-

denkan 1 (Printemps 1981):59–78. Frick, Esther and Margrit Bolli. 1969. Inventaire préliminaire des langues et dialects en Côte-d’Ivoire. Annales de

l’Université d’Abidjan (série H). Keita, Youssouf. 1979. Le manding de Côte-d’Ivoire, lère partie 1978–1979 (Extrait de rapport d’activité). Abidjan:

ILA, Université d’Abidjan. Keita, Youssouf. 1980. Le mandenkan de Côte-d’Ivoire. (Rapport MAPE No. 2). Abidjan: ILA, Université

d’Abidjan. Keita, Youssouf, and John Maire. 1980. Enquête d’intelligibilité des parlers manding de Côte-d’Ivoire. (Rapport

MAPE No. 3). Abidjan: ILA, Université d’Abidjan.

Mali DNAFLA. 1980. Les dialects du mandekan au Mali. (Etude sur l’Education de Base, Projet Mali 733). Bamako: Im-

primerie DNAFLA.

Senegal Balde, Abdoulaye. 1981. Etude comparée des parlers mandingues du Sénégal. Dakar: CLAD.

Material with respect to a particular language, by language Mandinka

Ashrif, M. I. and B. Sidibe. 1965. English-Mandinka dictionary. Bathhurst: Government Printing House. Creissels, Denis and Sidia Jatta. 1981. La composition verbale en mandinka. Mandenkan 2 (Automne 1981):31–48. Creissels, Denis. 1982. A propos de défauts de mémorisation de signifiants par les locuteurs mandinka. Mandenkan

4 (Automne 1981):49–55. Creissels, Denis, Sidia Jatta (Sidiya Jaata), and Kalifa Jobateh (Kaliifa Jobaate). 1982. Lexique mandinka-français.

Mandenkan 3 (Printemps 1982): 1–207. Creissels, Denis. 1983. Eléments de Grammaire de la langue mandinka. Grenoble: Université des langues et letters. Dumestre, Gérard. 1982. Note sur les adverbs idéophoniques du mandinka. Mandenkan 4 (Automne 1982):95–98. Rowlands, E. C. 1959. A grammar of Gambian Mandinka. London: School of Oriental and African Studies.

Maninka Spears, R. 1965. A note on the tone of Maninka. Substantives. Journal of African Languages 5:113–120. Spears, R. 1966. Maninka Substantive. Journal of African Languages 5:113–120. Spears, R. 1968. Tonal dissimilation in Maninka. Journal of African Languages 7:88–100. Welmers, William E. 1949. Tonemes and tone writing in Maninka. Studies in Linguistics 7(1):1–17.

Mauka Creissels, Denis. 1982a. Notes d’enquête sur la tonologie du maukakan. Cahiers Ivoiriens de Recherche Linguis-

tique (CIRL) 11:77–100. Creissels, Denis. 1982b. Note sur les prédicatifs su maukakan. Mandenkan 4 (Automne 1982):2–16.

Marka Prost, A. 1977. Petite grammaire marka (région de Zaba). nl.

Worodugu Gingiss, P. 1973. Worodugukan: A comparative and descriptive study. Ann Arbor: University Microfilms. Keita, Youssouf. 1976. Phonologie du worodugu de Séguela (Mémoire de maîtrise). Abidjan: ILA, Université

d’Abidjan.

33

Xassonke Koite-Herschel, Ute. 1981. La translation du constituent verbal: le cas du xasonga. Mandenkan 2 (Automne

1981):3–16.

Mande languages, in general Bimson, Kent D. 1976. Comparative reconstruction of Mandekan. Studies in African Linguistics 7(3):295–351. Bimson, Kent D. 1978. Comparative reconstruction of proto-northern-western Mande. Los Angeles: University of

California at Los Angeles. Derive, Marie-José. 1978. Rapport sur les langues mandé-nord de Côte-d’Ivoire. Cahiers Ivoiriens de Recherche

Linguistique (CIRL) 7. Dwyer, David. 1978. Idiosyncratic, suprasegmental processes in Mande. Studies in African Linguistics 9(3):333–

344. Galtier, Gérard. 1978. Classification renversée des langues du groupe mandé. ERA 248 CNRS-INLCO, ORCE-

MONT 2:95–97. Houis, Maurice. 1959. Le groupe linguistique mandé. Notes Africaines 82:38–41. Houis, Maurice. 1963. Rapport sur les langues du groupe mandé. Actes du second colloque international de linguis-

tique négro-africaine, 1962, Dakar. Houis, Maurice. 1981. Les langues du groupe mandé. Les langues dans le monde ancien et moderne, ed. by Jean

Perrot, 9–73. Paris: CNRS. Innes, G. 1967. Genitival phrases in Mande languages. African Language Studies, 160–167. Long, R. W. 1971a. A comparative study of the northern Mande languages. Ann Arbor: University Microfilms. Long, R. W. 1971b. The northern Mande languages: A statistical protesting of 22 ideolects. (Communication au

congrès d’études mandingues) London: University of London. Manessy, Gabriel. 1962. Nom et verbe dans les langues mandé. Journal of African Languages 1(1):57–68. Manessy, Gabriel. 1964. La relation génitive dans quelques langues mandé. Proceedings of the Ninth International

Congress of Linguists. La Hague: Mouton. Platiel, Suzanne. 1978. Les langues mandé. Inventaire des études linguistiques sur les pays d’Afrique Noire

d’Expression Française et sur Madagascar, ed. by Daniel Barreteau, 41–62. Paris: Conseil International de la Langue Française.

Prost, A. 1953. Les langues mandé-sud du groupe mana-busa. Dakar: IFAN. Prost, A. 1982. Des pluriels exclusif et inclusif “nous” dans les langue mande. Mandenkan 4 (Automne 1982):41–

48. Welmers, William E. 1958. The Mande languages. Georgetown University Series on Languages and Linguistics No.

11:9–24. Washington D. C.: Georgetown University. Welmers, William E. 1971. Niger-Congo, Mande. Current trends in linguistics, vol. 7, ed. by Thomas A. Sebeok,

113–140. The Hague: Mouton.

Bibliographies Brasseur, P. 1964. Bibliographie génerale du Mali (Ancien Soudan français et Haut-Sénégal). Dakar: IFAN. DNAFLA. 1982. Bibliographie Mandingue. (Projet Mandingue-Peulh: MAPE). Bamako, Mali: Imprimerie

DNAFLA. Hair, P. E. H. 1962. Bibliography of the Mande language. Sierra Leone Language Review 1:39–61. Ingemann, Frances. 1973. A Bibliography of Liberian Lnaguages. University of Liberia Journal.

General references regarding study of African languages Barrateau, Daniel, ed. 1978. Inventaire des etudes linguistiques sur les pays d’Afrique noire d’expression Française

et sur Madagascar. Paris: Conseil International de la langue française. Dalby, David, ed. 1970. Language and history of Africa. London: Frank Cass and Co. Grimes, Barbara F. ed. 1978. Ethnologue. Huntington Beach, California: Wycliffe Bible Translators, Inc. Lavergne de Tressan, E. 1953. Inventaire linguistique de l’Afrique occidentale Française et du Togo. Dakar: IFAN. Meillet, A. et Marcel Cohen. 1952. Les langues du monde. Paris: CNRS. Homburger, L. 1957. Les langues négro-africaines et les peuples qui les parlent. Paris: Payet.

34

Greenberg, Joseph. 1963. The languages of Africa. International Journal of American Linguistics 29:1 (part 2). 1966. The Hague: Mouton. 1970. Bloomington: Indiana University.

Perrot, Jean, ed. 1981. Les langues dans le monde ancient et moderne. Paris: CNRS. Thomas, Jacqueline M. C. and Anne Behaghel. 1980. La linguistique africaniste française. Le point de la question en

1980. Paris:SELAF. Voegelin, C. E. and F. M. 1977. Classification and index of the world’s languages. New York: Elsevier. Westermann, D. 1952a. African linguistic classification. Africa 22:250–256. Westermann, D. and M. A. Bryan. 1952b. The languages of West Africa. (Part 2: Handbook of African languages).

London: Oxford University Press. Welmers, William E. 1963. Review of The languages of Africa by Goseph H. Greenberg. WORD 19:407–417. Welmers, William E. 1971a. Mande, Niger-Congo. Current Trends in Linguistics, vol 7. The Hague: Mouton. Welmers, William E. 1971b. Checklist of African language and dialect names. Current Trends in Linguistics, vol 7,

ed. by Thomas A. Sebeok, 759–900. The Hague: Mouton. Welmers, William E. 1973. African language structures. Los Angeles: University of California Press.

Sociolinguistic or survey related Anderson, Douglas. 1981. Profil sociolilnguistique préliminaire sur la langue malinké. Abidjan: Société Internation-

ale de Linguistique. ms. Bendor-Samuel, John. 1980. A Sociolinguistic profile for translation planning. Abidjan. ms. Bendor-Samuel, John. 1982. What answers obviate the need for further research? Notes On Linguistics, Special Pub-

lication No. 2, ed. by George L. Huttar, 9–14. Dallas: Summer Institute of Linguistics. Bolli, Margirt, Eva Flik, and John Bendor-Samuel.1972. Testing the mutual intelligibility of dialects—Yakouba dia-

lect survey. Paper presented to the 10th West African Languages Congress. March 21–27, Accra. Casad, Eugene H. 1974. Dialect intelligibility testing. Summer Institute of Linguistics publications in linguistics and

related fields, No. 38. Dallas, Tex. Church, Eric. 1972. Informal report on Manding of Senegal. Abidjan SIL. Dwyer, David and Kay Irish. 1982. Language resource project. Studies in African Linguistics 13(2):215–216. Groff, Randy and Paul Solomiac. 1982a. Winye (Ko) survey. Abidjan. Société Internationale de Linguistique. ms. Groff, Randy and Paul Solomiac. 1982b. Preliminary Pana survey. Abidjan. Société Internationale de Linguistique.

ms. Kokora, Pascal D. 1979. Les contacts des langues africaines cas d’espace: la Côte-d’Ivoire. CIRL 5:85–105. Prost, A. 1971. Méthodes d’enqête et de description des langues sans tradition écrite. Paper delivered to colloques

internationaux du centre national de la recherche scientifique. 28 juin–2 juillet, Nice. Simons, Gary, ed. 1977. Language variation and survey techniques (Workpapers in Papua New Guinea Languages

vol. 21). Ukarumpa, Papua New Guinea: Summer Institute of Linguistics. Welmers, William E. 1957. Report on Senufo dialect studies. Korhogo, Côte-d’Ivoire: Mission Baptiste. ms.