Linguistic resemblances denote a historical relationship. This suggest
that resemblances in fundamental vocabulary and culture terms can help one
reconstruct the culture of the speakers of related languages. We use historical
linguistic methods to document the history of a language in both vocabulary and
grammar.
The historical linguist looks at language across languages
and uses the knowledge he learns to reconstruct the Proto
(hypothetical)-language form of a present language traced back to ancient times.
Each lexical item traced back to the Proto-language is called a
cognate.
This makes it clear that a person's language provides us with
evidence of the elements of a group's culture. Using semantic anthropology we
can reconstruct Paleo-terms. Paleo-terms can help us make inferences about a
culture going backwards in time to an impenetrable past undocumented by written
records. This is semantic anthropology, a linguistic approach which seeks to
discover aspects of man's culture from his language. Thusly, linguistic
resemblances can help the anthropologist make precise inferences about a groups
culture elements.
Phonology is the study of changes, transformations,
modifications, etc., of phonemes or speech sounds during the history and
development of a language. To denote these changes the linguist considers each
phoneme in the light of the part it plays in the structure of speech
forms.
There are no clearly established linguistic markers that can
measure language change. Languages are not constrained by a preprogrammed
reproductive cycle. This means that language can undergo extensive and radical
changes over a either a short, or long time span.
This makes it very
difficult for historical and comparative linguist to chart linguistic changes
based solely or archaeologi
-cal data. Thusly, borrowing and convergence are
important factors which must be accounted for in any discussion of language
change. Linguists therefore, can not examine language change in isolation from
the social and historical factors affecting the speaker of the language(s) being
examined and discussed.
The socioderme is the transitional unit in
language change. This view is especially true, given the fact that language is
communal property, i.e. the property of the social or ethnic group which speaks
it.
It is the group that identifies aspects of a language and legitimize
its proper usage in society. Group membership not only produces variations
across gender and ethnic groups, it also helps establish the norms of language
spoken by that particular group.
In Historical linguistics, you reconstruct
the Proto-Language of the the Super-Language Family and the proto-language of
the subgroups or branches in the family tree.
In Historical linguistics
the goals of comparative and internal reconstruction differ. Comparative
reconstruction seeks to recover the prehistoric linguistics elements of a
language or group of languages and establish a genetic relationship between or
among language speakers. Linguistic reconstruction is used to establish specific
relationships between and among language speakers.
Internal
Reconstruction is used to compare languages with corresponding forms--that
must be attested by a review of earlier stages of a language documented in text.
Having text of earlier stages of a language for comparative purposes provides
credibility to the methods used in internal reconstructions. Thisn is why many
of the reconstruction proposed by Saussure of Proto-Indo European were not
empirically confirmed until the discovery of Hittite.
To confirm a
genetic relationship you must reconstruct the proto-language. A
proto-language is a term used to refer to the earliest form of a language
established by means of the comparative method of
reconstruction.

Reconstruction of the
proto-language allows us to discover the superordinate proto-language
(SPL) which represents the 'mother language'of a Super Family of
languages. It can also lead to the establishment of reconstructed descendant
languages closely related to one-another that form a subgroup in the Super
Family of languages like Proto-Indo-European, which would represent a
intermediate proto-language (IPL).

As a result, we can reconstruct the
Proto-language of the Super Family: Negro/Black African-Egyptian (BAE)
the SPL, while reconstructing the proto-language of the the languages in each
subgroup, e.g., Mande, which includes a variety of dialects and represent the
IPLs. But neither Proto-Bantu or Proto-Mande forms any sort of hierarchy for
BAE, the Mande and Bantu language families are simply sub-groups in the much
larger BAE Super Family of African languages.
HISTORICAL
LINGUISTICS
A person's language provides us with evidence of the elements
of a group's culture. Diop has noted that reconstruction of Paleo-African terms
can help us make inferences about a group's culture going backwards in time to
an impenetrable past undocumented by written records. This is semantic
anthropology, a linguistic approach which seeks to discover aspects of man's
culture from his language. Thusly, linguistic resemblances can help the
anthropologist make precise inferences about a groups culture
elements.
Linguistic resemblances denote a historical relationship. This
suggest that resemblances in fundamental vocabulary and culture terms can help
one reconstruct the culture of the speakers of genetically related
languages.
LINGUISTIC CONSTANCY
The rate at which languages change
is variable. It appears that linguistic change is culture specific.
Consequently, the social organization and political culture of a particular
speech community can influence the speed at which languages change.
Based
on the history of language change in Europe most linguists believe that the rate
of change for all languages is both rapid and constant.(Diagne, 1981,p.238) The
idea that all languages change rapidly is not valid for all the World's
languages.
African languages change much slower than European languages.
(Armstrong, 1962) For example, African vocabulary items collected by Arab
explorers over a thousand years ago are analogous to contemporary lexical
items.(Diagne,1981, p.239) In addition there are striking resemblances between
the ancient Egyptian language and Coptic, and Pharonic Egyptian and African
languages.(Diagne, 1981; Diop, 1977; Obenga, 1993)
The political
stability of African political institutions has caused languages to change very
slowly in Africa. Pawley and Ross (1993) argue that a sedentary life style may
account for the conservative nature of a language.
African oral
traditions and the eye witness accounts of travelers to Africa, make it clear
that African empires although made up of diverse nationalities illustrated
continuity. To accomodate the plural nature of African empires Africans
developed a Federal system of government. (Niane , 1984) In fact we can not
really describe ancient African state systems as empires, since this implies
absolute rule or authority in a single individual. This political state of
affairs rarely existed in ancient Africa, because in each African speech
community local leadership was elected by the people within the community.
(Diop, 1987) For example the Egyptians often appointed administrators over the
conquered territories from among the conquered people. (Diop ,1991)
The
continuity of many African languages may result from the steady state nature of
African political systems, and long standing cultural stability since neolithic
times. (Diop, 1991 ; Winters 1985) This cultural stability has affected the
speed at which African languages change.
In Africa due to the relative
stability of socio-political structures and settled life, there has not been
enough pressure exerted on African societies as a whole and African speech
communities in particular, to cause radical internal linguistic changes within
most African languages. Permanent settlements led to a clearly defined system of
inheritance and royal succession. These traits led to stability on both the
social and political levels.
This leads to the hypothesis that
linguistic continuity exist in Africa due to the stability of African
socio-political structures and cultural systems. This relative cultural
stability has led African languages to change more slowly then European and
Asian languages. Diop (1974) observed that:
First the evolution
of languages, instead of moving everywhere at the same rate of speed seems
linked to other factors; such as , the stability of social organizations or the
opposite, social upheavals. Understandably in relatively stable societies man's
language has changed less with the passage of time.(pp.153-154)
There is
considerable evidence which supports the African continuity concept. Dr.
Armstrong (1962) noted the linguistic continuity of African languages when he
used glottochronology to test the rate of change in Yoruba. Comparing modern
Yoruba words with a list of identical terms collected 130 years ago by Koelle ,
Dr. Armstrong found little if any internal or external changes in the terms. He
concluded that:
I would have said that on this evidence African languages
are changing with glacial slowness, but it seems to me that in a century a
glacier would have changed a lot more than that. Perhaps it would be more in
order to say that these languages are changing with geological slowness.
(Armstrong, 1962, p.285).
Diop's theory of linguistic constancy
recognizes the social role language plays in African language change. Language
being a variable phenomena has as much to do with a speaker's society as with
the language itself. Thus social organization can influence the rate of change
within languages. Meillet (1926, 17) wrote that:
Since language is a
social institution it follows that linguistics is a social science, and the only
variable element to which one may appeal in order to account for a linguistic
change is social change, of which language variations are but the
consequences.
THE BLACK AFRICAN ORIGIN OF EGYPT
Diop has
contributed much to African linguistics. He was a major proponent of the
Dravidian-African relationship (Diop 1974, 116), and the African substratum in
Indo-European languages in relationship to cacuminal sounds and terms for social
organiza-tion and culture (1974, 115). Diop (1978, 113) also recognized that in
relation to Arabic words, after the suppression of the first consonant, there is
often an African root.
Diop's major linguistic effort has been the
classification of Black African and Egyptian languages . Up until 1977
Diop'smajor area of interest were morphological and phonological similarities
between Egyptian and Black African languages. Diop (1977, 77-84) explains many
of his sound laws for the Egyptian-Black African connection.
In
Parènte Génétique de l'Egyptien pharraonique et des Langues Négro Africaines
(PGEPLNA), Diop explains in some detail his linguistic views in the
introduction of this book. In PGEPLNA , Diop demonstrates the genetic
relationship between ancient Egyptian and the languages of Black Africa. Diop
provides thousands of cognate Wolof and Egyptian terms in support of his Black
African-Egyptian linguistic relationship.
PALEO-AFRICAN
African languages
are divided into Supersets (i.e., a family of genetically related languages,
e.g., Niger-Congo) sets, and subsets. In the sets of African languages there are
many parallels between phonological terms, eventhough there may be an arbitrary
use of consonants which may have a similar sound. The reason for these changes
is that when the speakers of Paleo-African languages separated, the various sets
of languages underwent separate developments. As a result a /b/ sound in one
language may be /p/ or /f/ in a sister language. For example, in African
languages the word for father may be baba , pa or fa, while in the Dravidian
languages we have appan to denote father.
Diop has noted that
reconstruction of Paleo-African terms can help us make inferences about an
ethnic group's culture going backwards in time to an impenetrable past
undocumented by written records. This is semantic anthropology, a linguistic
approach which seeks to discover aspects of man's culture from his language.
Thusly, linguistic resemblances can help the anthropologists make precise
inferences about a linguistic group's cultural elements.
BLACKS IN WEST
ASIA
In PGEPLNA Diop makes clear his views on the role of African
languages in the rise of other languages. Using archaeological evidence Diop
makes it clear that the original West Asians: Elamites and Sumerians were of
Black origin (1974, 1977, xxix-xxxvii).
Diop (1974, 1991) advocates the
unity of Black Africans
and Blacks in West Asia. Winters
(1985,1989,1994) has elaborated on the linguistic affinity of African and West
Asian languages.
This view is supported by linguistic evidence. For
example these languages share demonstrative bases:
Proximate Distant
Finite
Dravidian i a u
Manding i a u
Sumerian bi
a
Wolof i a u
The speakers of West Asian and Black African
languages also share basic culture items:
Chief city,village
black,burnt
Dravidian cira, ca uru kam
Elamite Salu
Sumerian Sar ur
Manding Sa furu kami,"charcoal'
Nubia
sirgi mar
Egyptian Sr mer kemit
Paleo-African *sar *uru
*kam
OBENGA
Obenga (1978) gives a phonetic analysis of Black
African and Egyptian. He illustrates the genetic affinity of consonants within
the Black African (BA) and Egyptian languages especially the occlusive bilateral
sonorous, the occlusive nasal apico-dental /n/ and /m/ , the apico-alveolar /r/
and the radical
proto-form sa: 'man, female, posterity' in Black
Africa.
Language
Agaw asau, aso 'masculine
Sidama asu
'man'
Oromo asa id.
Caffino aso id.
Yoruba so
'produce'
Meroitic s' man
Fonge sunu id.
Bini eso
'someone'
Kikongo sa,se,si 'father'
Swahili (m)zee 'old
person'
Egyptian sa 'man'
Manding si,se
'descendant,posterity,family'
Azer se 'individual, person'
Obenga
(1978) also illustrated the unity between the verbs 'to come, to be, to
arrive':
Language
Egyptian ii, ey Samo, Loma dye
Mbosi yaa
Bisa gye
Sidama/Omo wa Wolof nyeu
Caffino wa Peul yah,
yade
Yoruba wa Fonge wa
Bini ya Mpongwe bya
Manding ya,dya
Swahili (Ku)ya
between t =/= d, highlight the alternation patterns of
many Paleo-African consonants including b =/= p, l =/= r ,and
g =/=
k.
The Egyptian term for grain is 0 sa #. This corresponds to many
African terms for seed,grain:
Galla senyi
Malinke se ,
si
Sumerian se
Egyptian sen 'granary'
Kannanda
cigur
Bozo sii
Bambara sii
Daba sisin
Somali
sinni
Loma sii
Susu sansi
Oromo sanyi
Dime
siimu
Egyptian ssr 'corn'
id. ssn 'lotus plant'
id. sm
'herb, plant'
id. isw 'weeds'
In conclusion, Diop has done
much to encourage the African recovery of their history. His theories on
linguistics has inspired many African scholars to explain and elaborate the
African role in the history of Africa and the world. This has made his work
important to our understanding of the role of Black people in
History.
In summary, Historical linguistics, you reconstruct the Proto-Language of the the Super-Language Family and the proto-language of the subgroups or branches in the family tree. As you can see, historical linguistics is not used to explain the use of a specific term, in a specific language it is used to determine term proto-terms used in a family of languages. This means tha you can not use terms from cognate languages to explain the meaning of: ‘Ba”. The meaning of Ba has already been determined by the Egyptians themselves.
REFERENCES
Armstrong,R.G. (1962).
Glottochronology and African linguistics. Journal of African History,3(2),
283-290.
Baines, J. (1991, August 11). Was civilization made in Africa?
The New York Times Review of Books, 12-13.
Bynon,T. (1978). Historical
linguistics. London: Cambridge University Press.
Crawley,T. 1992. An
Introduction to Historical Linguistics. Oxford: Oxford University
Press.
Delafosse,M. (1901). La Langue Mandigue. Paris.
Diagne,P.
(1981). In J. Ki-Zerbo (Ed.), General history of Africa I: Methodology and
African prehistory (233-260). London: Heinemann Educational Books
Ltd.
Diop, C.A. (1974). The African Origin of Civilization: Myth or
Reality. Westport, Conn.:Lawrence Hill and Company.
Diop,C.A. (1977).
Parentè gènètique de l'Egyptien Pharaonique et des languues Negro-Africaines.
Dakar: Institut Fondamental d'Afrique Noire.
Diop, C.A. (1978).
Precolonial Black Africa. Wesport, Conn. :Lawrence Hill and
Company.
Diop, C.A. 1981. A methodology for the study of migrations. In
African Ethnonyms and Toponyms, by UNESCO. (Unesco: Paris) 86--110.
Diop, C.A. (1991). Civilization or Barbarism.
Brooklyn,N.Y.:
Lawrence Hill Books.
Dweyer, D.J. (1989). 2. Mande.
In John Bendor-Samuel (Ed.), The Niger-Congo Languages (47-65). New York:
University Press of America.
Ehret,C. (1988). Language change and the
material correlates of language and ethnic shift. Antiquity, 62,
564-574.
Ehret,C. & Posnansky (Eds.). (1982). The Archaeological and
linguistic reconstruction of African history. Berkeley: University of California
Press.
Hock,H.H. (1988). Principles of historical linguistics. Amsterdam:
Mouton de Gruyter.
Labov,W.(1965). The social motivation of a sound
change. Word, 19, 273-309.
Labov.,W. (1972). The internal evolution of
linguistic rules. In Stokwell,R.P. and Macaulay, R.K.S. (eds.) Linguistic change
and generative theory (101-171). Bloomington: Indiana University
Press.
Lefkowitz, M. (1992, February 10). Not out of Africa. The New
Republic, 29-36.
Mbiti, J. S. 1970. African religions and Philosophy.
Garden City: Anchor Press.
Meillet, A. 1926. Introduction à l'etude
comparatif des languages Indo-Europeennes. Paris.
Moitt,B. (1989) Chiekh
Anta Diop and the African diaspora: Historical continuity and socio-cultural
symbolism. Presence Africaine, 149/150, 347-360.
Pawley,A. & Ross,M.
(1993). Austronesian historical linguistics and culture history. Annual Review
of Anthropology, 22, 425-459.
McIntosh, S. K. & McIntosh, R. (1983).
Forgotten Tells of Mali. Expedition, 35-47.
Niane,D.T.(Ed.). (1984).
Introduction. General History of Africa IV (1-14). London: Heinemann Educational
Books.
Obenga,T. (1978). The genetic relationship between Egyptian
(ancient Egyptian and Coptic) and modern African languages. In
UNESCO
(Ed.), The peopling of ancient Egypt and the deciphering of the Meroitic script
(65-72). Paris: UNESCO.
Obenga, T. (1993). Origine commune de l'Egyptien
Ancien du Copte et des langues Negro-Africaines Modernes. Paris: Editions
L'Harmattan.
Lord,R. (1966). Comparative Linguistics. London: St. Paul's
House.
Olderogge, L. (1981). Migrations and ethnic and linguistic
differentiations. In J. Ki-Zerbo (Ed.),General History of Africa I: Methodology
and African History (271-278). Paris: UNESCO.
Robins, R.H. (1974).
General Linguistics. Bloomington: Indiana State University Press.
Ruhlen,
M. 1994. The origin of language. New York: John Wiley & Sons,
Inc.
Welmers, W. (1968). Niger Congo-Mande. In T.A. Sebeok (Ed.),
Current Trends in Linguistics, 7,113-140.
Williams, B. (1987). The
A-Group Royal Cemetery at Qustul:Cemetery L. Chicago: Oriental Institute,
University of Chicago Press.
Winters,C.A. (1985). The Proto-Culture of
the Dravidians, Manding and Sumerians.Tamil Civilization,3(1),
1-9.
Winters,C.A. (1986). The Migration routes of the Proto-Mande. The
Mankind Quarterly,27(1), 77-96.
Winters, C.A. 1989. Tamil, Sumerian,
Manding and the genetic model. International Journal of Dravidian Linguistics,
18 (1), 98-127.
Winters, C.A. (1994). Afrocentrism:A valid frame of
reference. Journal of Black Studies, 25 (2), 170-190.
Yurco,F. 1989. Were
the ancient Egyptians Black? Biblical Archaeology.