THE PHONOLOGICAL DIFFERENCES WITHIN THE SOUTHERN NYANZA DIALECT OF THE DHOLUO LANGUAGE
A RESEARCH PAPER PRESENTED TO THE DEPARTMENT OF LANGUAGE AND LITERATURE EDUCATION OF THE MASINDE MULIRO UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR AWARD OF BACHELOR OF EDUCATION (ARTS) DEGREE IN ENGLISH AND LITERATURE
BY
OTIENO FREDRICK OMONDI
OF
REGISTRATION NUMBER EDA/0502/14
AUGUST,2020
DECLARATION OF AUTHORSHIP
I, FREDRICK OMONDI OTIENO OF REGISTRATION NUMBER EDA/0502/14, declare that this research project and the work presented in it are my own and has been generated by me as the result of my own original research.
I confirm that:
This work was done wholly or mainly while in candidature for a research degree at this University;
Where any part of this research paper has previously been submitted for a degree or any other qualification at this University or any other institution, this has been clearly stated;
Where I have consulted the published work of others, this is always clearly attributed;
Where I have quoted from the work of others, the source is always given. With the exception of such quotations, this thesis is entirely my own work;
I have acknowledged all main sources of help;
Where the thesis is based on work done by myself jointly with others, I have made clear exactly what was done by others and what I have contributed myself;
Either none of this work has been published before submission, or parts of this work have been published.
Signed: …………………………………………………………………………
DATED ON THIS 14TH DAY OF AUGUST,2020.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I would like to express my sincere gratitude to my primary supervisor, Dr.Mudogo Angatia, who guided me throughout this research project.I would also like to thank my family and friends who offered deep insight into the project.
I wish to acknowledge the help provided by the technical and support team at the Department of Language and Literature Education of Masinde Muliro University of Science and Technology.
ABSTRACT
This study set out to investigate the Sub dialects within South Nyanza dialect of Dholuo. The analysis was done within the framework of Variationist Theory proposed by Labov (1963). The main objective of the study was to investigate the phonological within the South Nyanza dialect and the data used for the study was drawn from native speakers of South Nyanza dialect living in Kisumu, Homabay and Migori counties. The study has revealed that vowel processes such as deletion, root lengthening, and glide formation are responsible for the phonological differences observed in South Nyanza dialect of Dholuo. The study also revealed that the occurrence of these phonological differences is determined by the geographical locations of the speakers.
CHAPTER ONE
INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY
1.1 Background of the Study
The concern of this chapter is to give the background information of the study. It begins with a discussion on the background of the language of the study and background of the study. It also looks at the statement of the research problem under investigation, the objectives of the study, the hypothesis to be tested, the rationale for the study, the scope and limitation and a review of the literature. The significance of the study, and the research methodology used in the study are provided as well in this chapter.
1.1.1 Background of the Language
The language under study is Dholuo. Dholuo language is spoken by the Luo community of Kenya and Tanzania. Particularly, it is spoken in an area surrounding parts of the Eastern shores of Lake Victoria. Greenberg (1995) suggests that Dholuo is a member of the Western Nilotic Branch of Nilotic group of languages. He further posits that Lango and Acholi are the closest linguistic relatives of Dholuo.
Presently, in Kenya, the Dholuo speakers are found in Siaya, Kisumu, Homabay and Migori counties. However, a number of Dholuo speaking families can also be found in other parts of Kenya as a result of marriage and migration. Dholuo has a large number of speakers. The national population census of Kenya of 2019 puts the number of Luo at five million sixty six thousands nine hundred and sixty six(5,066,966). In the immediate neighbourhood of the Luo are the Luhya, Gusii, Kuria, Suba, Maasai and Kalenjin speech communities with whom they have varying degrees of contact that has also seen borrowing of linguistic items from the languages to Dholuo and vice versa.
Stafford (1967) identified two major geographical dialects of Dholuo: the Trans-Yala and South Nyanza varieties. However, Oduol (1990) in her major work on Dholuo dialects classified these varieties as the Boro-Ukwala and the South Nyanza dialects respectively. This study adopts Oduol’s classification.
1.1.2 Background to the Study
As stated in section 1.1 above, Dholuo has a large speech community that lives in different parts of the country and as a result has developed varieties in relation to the geographical locations in which the speakers live. Boro-Ukwala dialect is spoken by the Luo community living in Ugenya, Alego, Yimbo and parts of Gem in the county of Siaya. The South Nyanza dialects, on the other hand, is spoken in Kisumu, Homa bay, Migori counties and some parts of Siaya counties (Oduol 1990).
These two dialects of Dholuo exhibit a high degree of mutual intelligibility. However, it is possible to distinguish these two varieties on the basis of their phonological, lexical and grammatical structures. This study is based on the assumptionn that dialects of a language are characterized by differences of vocabulary, grammar and phonology. Trudgill (2000:5) posits that dialects refer to differences between kinds of language which are reflected in the vocabulary, grammar and pronunciation. These linguistic differences may develop as a result of the geographical separation of the speakers.
Speakers of Dholuo language have interacted with neighbouring speech communities. According to Langacker (1968:176) there is no language whose speakers have had contact with any other language that is completely free of borrowed forms. The speakers of Boro-Ukwala dialect have had contact for a long time with the adjacent Luhya dialects of Lunyala, Lumarachi, Samia and Wanga. On the other hand, the speakers of South Nyanza dialects have interacted with languages such as Ekegusii, Kuria, Luhya and dialects of Kalenjin. These contacts and interaction with the languages of the neighbouring communities have led to borrowing of linguistic items such as lexical and phonological forms into this variety of Dholuo.
Borrowing as a word formation process can lead to lexical and phonological variation within a dialect of a language. In the case of Dholuo dialects, the borrowed words may be varied because they come from different sources as the speakers of South Nyanza dialect neighbour different communities. For example, Kisumu county neighbour Siaya county on the Seme side, Luhya, Nandis, and Kipsigis. Homabay county has the Kisii and Suba has their neighbours while Migori has Kisii, Maasai and Kuria as their neighbours. This study would attempt to establish and account for the salient phonological variation within the South Nyanza dialect of Dholuo.
1.2 Statement of the Problem
In this study, the research attempts to identify, describe and analyse the phonological variation within Kisumu- South Nyanza dialect of Dholuo. There is a considerable amount of documented research and literature on Dholuo. Such works include Omondi (1982) that looked at the syntax of Dholuo. In this study, Omondi established and discussed morphological processes involved in the formation of Dholuo words such as compounding, affixation, and reduplication. This study, however, differs from the present study in terms of approach. The present study is an attempt to describe the phonological difference within South Nyanza dialect.
Okombo (1997) also studied what can be described as the Functional Grammar of Dholuo. His study aimed at providing a descriptively adequate account of constituent order in Dholuo. The study concentrated on grammatical aspects of Dholuo such as nouns, verbs and adjectives. Even though this study and the present study are both concerned with Dholuo language, the present looks into sub dialectical variation within South Nyanza dialect of Dholuo.
Other studies in the field of sociolinguistic particularly on dialectical variation include Oduol (1990), which established the existence of Dholuo regional dialects. Her study set out to define the dialects of Dholuo by identifying the phonological, grammatical, lexical, and morphological features that mark each dialect. This study is relevant to my study except that ours is a focus on one of the dialects she identified-South Nyanza, with the aim of defining its sub varieties.
Ochieng (2012) also did a comparative study of dialectical differences within the Boro-ukwala dialect and established that Boro-Ukwala dialect has sub dialects mainly Ugenya, Alego, Yimbo and Gem and that the differences in phonological, lexical and morphological features are great enough to seriously impact variation among them. Her study and the present study are similar in their approach. However, while her study focused on the Boro-Ukwala dialect of Dholuo, this study confines itself to South Nyanza dialect of Dholuo. To this end, a systematic study on the phonological variation within the South Nyanza dialect has not been carried out.
Phonological features are significant in the study of language variation. They provide evidence for language change as well as reveal the phonological processes and lexical features that are unique to a particular language or variety. A study to identify and analyze the phonological variation within the South Nyanza dialect of Dholuo is therefore of essence.
1.3 Research Questions
The questions this study seeks to address are:
What are the phonological differences within the South Nyanza Dholuo dialect?
What are the factors responsible for the phonological differences within the South Nyanza dialect?
In which environments do these differences occur?
1.4 Objectives of the Study
This study was guided by the following objectives.
To identify the phonological differences within the South Nyanza dialect features that mark Dholuo dialects.
To identify the factors responsible for the phonological differences within the South Nyanza dialect features that mark Dholuo dialects.
To establish the environment in which these phonological differences occur.
1.5 Rationale of the Study
This study focused on the sub-dialects of South Nyanza Dholuo particularly to establish the phonological differences between them. Languages and dialects are very important tools through which one can express one’s identity. The dialects we speak define speakers in terms of their geographical location, their community or ethnicity and even the groups to which they pledge their loyalties. A study on the dialectical variation is therefore necessary to shed light on the linguistic features that mark the dialects people speak showing that South Nyanza dialect has phonological differences that are regionally distributed.
This current study is motivated by the development in communication technology. Linguists are currently working on computer communication with an aim of developing software that can automatically translate communication into one’s own language. To accomplish this, the computer must be allowed to listen to many different varieties and dialects of a language. However, this can only happen if the respective dialect is studied and the people speaking them are recorded for ease of detection by the computer. It is for this reason that a study on Dholuo dialects is of essence to establish the linguistic features that characterize them.
The need to preserve our own local languages and dialects lends credence to this study. Our local dialects are the vehicles through which we preserve and transmit and maintain our ethnic, cultural and historical backgrounds. This study, is believed, gives us an insight into how Dholuo has changed and developed over time as an important part of cultural history.
1.6 Scope and Limitation
In this study, the researcher attempted to describe and analyze the phonological differences in the South Nyanza dialect of Dholuo. Dholuo, as has been stated in section 1.1 above, is spoken by a large number of speakers living in different countries thus has developed numerous dialects. However, for the purpose of this study, the focus was on Dholuo spoken in Kenya particularly the South Nyanza dialect. This study examines specifically the sub-dialects phonological differences that vary within the South Nyanza dialect. It also studies the environment in which these differences occur.
Dialectical variation entails a number of linguistic elements. Dialects can differ with respect to pronunciation, grammar, vocabulary and syntax. However, the study only focused on the phonological differences within the South Nyanza dialect of Dholuo. No attempt was made to define the grammatical and morphological differences that might also be evident in South Nyanza dialect.
Dialects of a language can emerge as a result of social factors and geographical location of the speakers. The former results into social dialects while the latter gives geographical or regional dialects. This study only made reference to geographical determinants of dialectical variation as social determinants were beyond the scope of this study.
South Nyanza dialect of Dholuo is spoken in Kisumu, Homabay, and Migori counties of former South Nyanza region. However, for the purposes of this study, the research area covered the entire Kisumu county, Homabay town, Mbita and Oyugis areas of Homabay county, and Rongo and Awendo Sub counties of Migori county. The regions not mentioned above but are within South Nyanza dialect zones, were covered by this study.
1.7 Definition of Concepts
Dialect: a variety of a language that is distinguished from other varieties of the same language by features of phonology, grammar, and vocabulary, and by its use by a group of speakers who are set off from others geographically or socially.
Language variation: refers to regional, social, or contextual differences in the ways that a particular language is used.
1.8 Literature Review
This section is divided into two parts. Part one is about the review of literature relating to Dholuo language. Part two on the other hand, reviews literature pertaining to the theory selected for this study.
1.8.1 Literature on Dholuo Language
Huntingford (1959), Ogot (1967), Stafford (1967) and Tucker (1974) provide background information on Dholuo. Their works provide a historical background and the geographical location of the Luo. These studies were of significance to this present study as some data will be drawn from them.
Odhiambo (1981) studied Dholuo vowel processes using the Boro – Ukwala dialect in her presentation. This work is also important in my study for reference while analyzing the vowel sounds within South Nyanza. Oduol (1990) conducted a study on Dholuo dialects. The study aimed at defining the dialects of Dholuo by identifying the phonological, grammatical and lexical features which mark each dialect. The study established the existence of regional dialects namely; South Nyanza dialect and Boro-Ukwala dialect, which are phonologically, lexically and grammatically marked. This study was relevant to the present study as it provided the information that was useful in our analysis. Although this study is similar to the present study in terms of the language under analysis and the data, the present study aims at accounting for the phonological differences found in South Nyanza dialect within the framework of variationist theory, that is, analyzing the environment in which the differences occur.
Oduor (2002) investigates syllable weight and its effect in Dholuo phonology, showing how syllable weight is related to stress, tone and vowel process majorly deletion, compensatory lengthening and glide formation. This work gives an insight into Dholuo phonology which is an important aspect in this study.
Another study by Okombo (1997) was a description of Dholuo functional grammar. The study aimed to provide a descriptively adequate account of constituent order in Dholuo. It dealt with grammatical aspects such as nouns, verbs and adjectives. This study is a good source of data more so consonantal sounds for this study.
Ochieng (2012) carried out a comparative study of dialectical variation within Boro-Ukwala dialect. This study set out to identify and describe the linguistic differences in the dialect and to investigate the conditions in which these differences occur. Her study is relevant to the present study as it shows that the sub dialects of Boro-Ukwala dialect of Dholuo has been studied but not so with those of the South Nyanza dialect. To this end, the sub-dialects within the South Nyanza dialect have not been researched on.
Yamo (2014) studied loanword adaptation in Boro-Ukwala dialect of Dholuo. This study specifically examined the borrowing situation between Lumarachi and Dholuo with an aim of establishing the source of borrowing. This study is relevant to the current study as they both attempt to examine the features of the regional varieties of Dholuo.
1.8.2 Theoretical Literature
In this section, the research focused on a review of the literature of variationist theory, which is the theoretical framework within which this study will be carried out.
Variationist theory as was indicated in section 1.8 of this chapter was originally developed by Labov (1969). This theory aims to account for the grammatical structure in connected speech and to explain the apparent instability realized in linguistic form-function relations. It focusses on the speech of individuals as representations of members of a speech community.
Poplack (1993) carried out a study on variationist theory and language contact. This study explored how variationist sociolinguistic concerns may be applied to issues that are fundamental to the bilingual inquiry. The study selected code-switching and borrowing as the variants. The study found out that the principle of accountability may be difficult to apply in the case of code-switching and suggested that codes may be switched intrasententially only when the word order of both languages is homologous on either side of the switch point. On borrowing, it was realized that any content word in the language is fair game for borrowing.
A starting point for variationist theory was the research carried out by Labov on semantic viz a viz pronunciation. In this study, Labov (1969) found out that differences in pronunciation correspond to the same meaning. He further suggests that the relationship between meaning and form is defined by attributing meaning to varieties based on pattern of variation itself. Levon (2011) also carried a study on gender and sexuality in variationist theory. In his study, he analyzed pitch variation amongst a cohort of Israeli lesbians. The research demonstrated that even though gender and sexuality are strongly embedded in Israeli culture, some speakers linguistically attend to these constructs in identifiably distinct ways.
Wolfram and Fasold (1974) conducted a research on phonological variation among some speakers of English to establish the factors that contribute to the simplification of final consonant clusters in English words which end in /t/ and /d/. The results indicated that the deletion of these sounds occurs under four different linguistic conditions, amongst them whether the cluster is followed by a vowel or a consonantt, and whether the final member of the cluster is itself the past tense morpheme or not, (Wolfram and Fasold 1974:132)
Chambers and Trudgil (1980) in their study of variation in Norwich, a case of linguistic change, shows that age provides the principle variationist means for studying language change. This study showed that the 10-19 age group radically increases the instance of lowered and centralized /e/ even in their most formal styles. The analysis of the data further showed that Received Pronunciation of vowels like /e/ in such words as bell and tell is giving way to /ӕ/ and even /ᴧ/ (Chambers and Trudgil1980: 93).
One the traditional theory that has been used in the study of dialects is Dialectology. Francis (1983) defines dialectology as the study of dialects which are varieties of a language used by groups smaller than the total community of speakers of the language in question. Francis in his study majorly described the various methodology employed in dialectological studies.
Keith (1988) conceptualizes this theory as tool for collecting data for linguistic maps. It depicts the collection of maps showing the geographical distribution of some phonological, morphological, lexical or semantics linguistic variants. His study provided an insight in the data collection technique that was adopted for t
Chambers & Trudgill (1980) provides a detailed description of history and features of dialectology as a framework in the study of dialect. They described it as dialect geography whose main methodology is the questionnaire which can both be direct or indirect, and use of linguistic maps. They further points out that for the researcher to achieve reliability in data collection, the selection of informants should consist of non- mobile, older and rural residents. This study, like Keith’s (sic), enabled us to design a reliable research procedure for this study.
1.9 Theoretical Framework
The descriptive tool for this study is Variationist Theory. Variationist theory was developed by Labov and accounts for those properties of language which require reference to both external (social and geographical) as well as internal (systemic) factors in their explanations (Labov 1971). In essence, Variationist Theory concerns itself with the analysis of the interaction between language differences, social meaning and the development of linguistic elements themselves.
Labov, in his Variation Theory, postulates that variation is a basic component of language structure; the way a language is spoken differs across individuals as well as across situations encountered by the same individuals, and thus a socially realistic linguistic analysis provides valuable insights to the study of language (Labov 1971). He further notes that the theory utilizes data from large bodies of systematically collected contemporary language elements to develop accounts of language differences.
It is also argued in Variationist Theory that different linguistic forms can be used for the same function and that differences among competing forms may be neutralized in the discourse (Sankoff 1988: 153). And as Tagliamonte (2012:10) observes, the description of the data provided should be accountable of the data and that not only should the occurrence of a particular variant be noted, but also to identify the sites where it occurs even if the patterns revealed do not immediately support a specified theoretical position.
The theory holds that variation is an inherent part of language which can be observed and studied in that it shows variation and change in its historical development. It further indicates that language varies across different dialects within linguistic communities and sociogeographical distribution. Tagliamonte (2012) posits that such variation are rule- governed, that is, language variation is not haphazard phenomenon, but happens rather in systematic manner. The principle of accountability as formulated by variationists requires not only that occurrences of a particular variant should be noted, but also to identify sites where it occurs.
Variationist theory involves a combination of techniques from regional, sociology and anthropology to scientifically investigate language use and structure as manifested in naturalistic context. According to Sankoff (1988:141), the variationist viewpoint of language may be characterized by its concern with accounting for grammatical structure in connected discourse, and explaining the instability realized therein of linguistic form-function relations. To this end, variationist theory seeks to discover patterns of usage which pertain to the relative frequency of occurrence or co-occurrences of structures, rather than simply examining their existence or grammaticality.
The primary object of analysis of the Variationist Theory is the speech of the individuals or members of a speech community. Labov (1971) suggests that variationist study involves getting into the speech community, where observation of language use in its sociocultural setting is carried out. The goal of this procedure is to enable the researcher to gain access to the vernacular, which is the most relatively homogenous spontaneous speech reserved for intimate or casual situations (Poplack 1993:252). The vernacular in this case is taken to reflect the most systematic form of the language acquired by the speaker, prior to any subsequent efforts at style shifting.
In order to account for the variation in a given situation, the variationist must determine why, where, and when it was used, as well as by whom. In so doing, the researcher considers the role of extralinguistic influence and internal features of linguistic environment in determining the choice of a variant. Rand and Sankoff (1988) posit that the use of multivariate or ‘variable rule’ enables the analyst to extract regularities and tendencies from the data, and thereby determine how selection of a linguistic structure is influenced by specific configuration of factors that characterize the environment in which it occurs. This study attempts to illustrate how these consideration may be applied to the regional language variation contexts.
1.9.1 The Linguistic Variable
Labov (1969:728) as cited in Tagliamonte (2012:4) posits that variation is everywhere all the time, that is, variation is inherent. A linguistic variable is an element which has identifiable variants. He asserts that variationist research starts with the observation that language is inherently variable as there are different ways of saying more or less the same thing. Such inherent differences may occur at every level of grammar of a language, in every variety of a language, in every style, in every dialect, sub- dialect and in the same discourse.
Sankoff (1988: 142) observes that linguistic differences are alternatives within the same grammatical system with the same referential meaning in a discourse. Such differences in a speech community whether phonological or lexical do not vary haphazardly but systematically, and therefore it can be quantitatively modelled, according to Labov (1969).
There are three types of differences: markers, indicators, and stereotypes (Mesthrie et al. 2000:91). Markers are those differences which show stratification according to style and social class. Indicators, on the other hand, show differentiation by age or social group without being subject to style shifting, while stereotypes are forms that are socially marked as they are prominent in the linguistic awareness of speech communities.
1.9.2 The Principle of Accountability
The main unique feature of Variationist Theory which distinguishes it from other methods is its principle of accountability. With regard to this principle, the theory states that in addition to examining a variable, the researcher must also take in to account all the other potential variants within the given system. As Mesthrie (2000:92) notes, variationists stress the significance of collection and analysis of a corpus that adequately represents the speech of members of the community under the study.
This principle of Variationist Theory requires that all the potential forms in the subsystem of grammar that has been identified for investigation, and not simply the variant of interest, should be included in the analysis, Tagliamonte (2012:19). It therefore follows that the use of the variant under investigation can be reported as a portion of the total numbers of relevant constructions.
These differences as Mesthrie et al (2000:80) points out, should be frequent enough in ordinary conversation to appear unsolicited in brief interview, structurally linked to other elements in the linguistic system. The differences, he further notes, should exhibit a complex and subtle pattern of stratification by social groupings.
In justifying the need of accountability, Tagliamonte (2012) points out that it enables the researcher to know how a variant is influenced by a particular type of context compared to another. This, he said, requires knowledge of the distribution of feature out of the total number of contexts where it could have occurred but did not.
1.10 Research Hypotheses
The following hypotheses were tested.
That South Nyanza dialect has phonological differences that are regionally distributed.
That contact between speakers of South Nyanza dialect and other neighbouring languages is responsible for the phonological variation within South Nyanza dialect.
1.11 Research Methodology
This section provides a descriptive account of the procedures that was used in gathering and processing of empirical data pertinent to our investigation.
1.11.1 Data Collection
The researcher selected fifty respondents who are native speakers of South Nyanza dialect of Dholuo. The target population comprised those who live close to the boarders of neighbouring speech communities such as Nandi, Kisii, Luhya and Abasuba. There were ten respondents in each case. There was equal number of males and females in all samples. The respondents were selected through purposeful sampling within the research area. The minimum age bracket of the respondents was forty years. This age was believed to have had a relatively systematic acquisition form of the language that would in turn enable the researcher to assess any linguistic deviance.
Data was collected by administering questionnaires and interviews to the respondents. A focus group discussion was also carried out in which respondents and the researcher had the opportunity to interact and address some of the emerging issues related to the choice of linguistic forms and language use.
1.11.2 Data Analysis
An inventory of the data collected was made. They were then categorized according to their sources or regions within South Nyanza dialect speaking region such as Kisumu, Migori and Homa Bay. This was followed by classification based on the phonological variants. Finally, a description and analysis of the data was carried out within the framework of variationist theory.
1.12 Conclusion
Background information to the study has been given in this chapter. The chapter is introductory in its orientation. Particularly, it has outlined the background to the object language of this study which is Dholuo. The research problem, the objectives of the study and the hypotheses to be tested are also stated in the chapter. The last sections of the chapter has discussed the theoretical framework chosen for the study. The study adopted Variationist Theory as the tool that was used in the analysis of data. A review of literature, the scope and limitations and a description of the research methodology are also provided in this chapter. The chapter aimed at giving focus to the study.
CHAPTER TWO
BASIC DHOLUO PHONOLOGY
2.1 Introduction
The aim of this research is to study the phonological differences within the South Nyanza dialect. The purpose of this chapter is to give a basic description of the Dholuo consonant and vowel sounds so as to provide a basis upon which the phonological features of the South Nyanza dialect can be discussed. The chapter is phonological in its approach with emphasis on vowel processes that are instrumental in accounting for phonological-based dialectical variation.
The chapter is divided into sections. In section one, a brief discussion of Dholuo consonant is given. Section two provides an outline of vowels in Dholuo. The third section gives a brief account of vowel processes operating in Dholuo vowels. The last section highlights the role of suprasegmental features in marking dialectical variation.
It is worth to note from the outset that the information provided in this chapter heavily borrows from earlier studies on Dholuo such as Okombo (1977; 1982), Oduol (1990) and Oduor (2002). This information provides an invaluable insight in interpreting phonological dialectical variation observed in data from this study.
2.2 Dholuo Consonants
Earlier studies in Dholuo such as Okombo (1982) reveal that Dholuo has twenty one pure consonants and five nasal stop compounds. Oduor (2002) describes these nasal stop compounds as prenasalised stops that all function as unit phonemes.
The table below shows all the consonants of Dholuo
Table 2.1: Dholuo Consonants
IPA symbolOrthographicWordGlossrep.ppParmatbbBandomaizewwWang’eyemmMichgiftffFudustrawƟthThummusicðdhDhiang’cowttTong’eggddDerogranaryrrRichosinllLwenywarjyYathdrugssSuyasmellnnNangaclothtʃchChilodirtdӡjJuokwitchcraftɲnyNyukaporridgekkKomchairɡgGwenohenᵑngNg’wechathleticshhHonomiraclembmbMbutanileperchnðndhNdhadhotastendndNdiracholeraɲjnjNjagabhangᵑɡngNgegetilapiaPartly taken from Okombo (1982) and Oduor (2002)
2.3 Dholuo Vowels
Dholuo has nine vowels which are grouped into four pairs. Each pair contains [+Advanced Tongue Root] ([+ATR]) and [-Advanced Tongue Root] ([-ATR]), (Okombo 1982). One vowel, according to Oduor (2002:76), does not have a contrastive pair.
In the table below, the orthographic representation of Dholuo vowel sounds and their IPA symbols is shown. The IPA symbols on the left are [+ATR] whereas those on the right are [-ATR].
Table 2.2: Orthographic and Phonemic Representation of Dholuo Vowels
Orthographic representationIPA SymbolsUpper caseLower case[+ATR][-ATR]AaaEeeɛIiiɪOooᴐUuuʊAdopted from Oduor (2002:76)The table below shows Dholuo vowels as used in lexical contextsTable 2.3: Dholuo Vowels as used in Lexical ContextsOrthographyIPA symbolsExampleglossiiMich/mitʃ/to shrinkiɪMich/mɪtʃ/gifteeOlemo /olemo/A burning busheεOlemo /olεmo/fruitooGoro/goro/To be lastoᴐGoro/gᴐrᴐ/incubatoruuKungo /kungo/To handle with careuʊKungo /kʊngo/To save(money)aaChak/tʃak/milk24
2.4 Dholuo Vowel Processes
As in other languages, Dholuo vowels undergo various phonological processes. Okombo (1982) pointed out that Dholuo vowels undergo phonological processes such as deletion, vowel harmony, compensatory lengthening and glide-formation. These processes are instrumental in this research as they form the basis upon which phonological variation within South Nyanza dialect is partly assessed.
2.4.1 Glide formation
As shown in Table 2.1 above, there are two glides in Dholuo: the palatal glide (/j/) and bilabial glide (/w/). Okombo (1982: 21) posits that as a rule, the underlying high front vowel and high back vowel are realized as a palatal glide and bilabial glide, respectively, when they precede either a non-high vowel or a high vowel with the opposite value for the feature [+back]. The following examples illustrate this rule;
1.Chunyi+opodho/tʃuɲjopoðo/’your heart has failed’Nyiri + adek/ɲɪrjadek/’three girls’Nduklu + eke/nduklweke/’where is’
2.4.2 Deletion
Deletion as Okombo (1982) observes involves [–high] vowels such as /e, ε, a, o, ᴐ/. These vowels are deleted in contexts where they precede a vowel in an unstressed syllable. Adhiambo (1981) observed that deletion majorly takes place in unstressed word-final vowels and unstressed word-internal positions. In most cases, this process is optional.
The following examples demonstrate vowel deletion in Dholuo;
Abiriyo /abɪrɪjɔ/ Diriyo /dɪrɪjɔ/ Wuoyi /wuoji/ Rumbi /rumbi/ Ariyo /ariјɔ
Riyo /riјo/
–abiryo /abɪrjɔ/’seven’–driyo / drɪjɔ/’times two’–wuoy /wuoj/’boy’–rumb /rumb/’atmosphere’–aryo /arјɔ/’two’–ryo /rјo/’thirst’
2.4.3 Lengthening
Okombo (1982:23) notes that although Dholuo vowels are phonemically short,there is a rule that lengthens a vowel when it precedes one or two consonants that are followed by either one or no vowel at all in utterance final position. In a word that ends in a consonant, the rule affects the final vowel while in a word that ends in a vowel, the second last vowel gets affected. Oduol (1990:59) observes that this constitutes a root lengthening process and can be obligatory, optional or never realized at all. Vowel lengthening can be seen in the following examples;
3.Kano /kanɔ/→/ ka:nɔ/’to keep’Chilo /tʃilo/→/tʃi:lo/’dirt’Agulu /aɡulu/→/aɡu:lu/’pot’Cham /tʃam/→/tʃa:m/’grains’Kudho /kʊðɔ/→/ku:ðɔ/’thorn’Kom /kɔm/→/kɔ:m/’chair’Chiro /tʃiro/→/tʃi:ro/’market’
Adhiambo (1981) further notes that compensatory lengthening takes place when part of a word is deleted even though the condition under which the process takes place is not clear. This is seen in the following examples;
4.Agwata achiel/aɡwta:tʃɪεl/’one calabash’Richo orumo/ritʃo:rumo/’sin is finished’Wuotho ogik/woƟo:gik/’end of the walk’
2.4.4 Vowel Harmony
Hyman (1975:223) describes vowel harmony as a situation in which all vowels within a specified unit agree in some phonetic features. In Dholuo, the feature involved in vowel harmony is [ATR]. Okombo (1982:24) notes that the effect of harmony is noticed when an affix is added to the root of a given word and the tendency is for the vowel in the affix to acquire the tongue root position of the root vowel. He gives the example of the infinitive suffix –o which is realized as a plus or minus advanced tongue root depending on the root vowel.
Examples:5.Ter-o/tero/’to inherit’Rit-o/rito/’to watch over’Ngi-o/ɳɪjɔ/’to look’Rund-o/rundo/’to rotate’
2.4.5 Dholuo Syllable
Hyman (1975:188) describes syllable as a unit that consists of three phonetic units:the onset, the peak, and the coda. He further points out that syllables can be categorized as open and closed syllables. An open syllable ends in a vowel while a closed syllable ends in a consonant.
Oduor (2002) points out that Dholuo syllables exhibit two types of syllable structures: open and closed syllables. This is shown below.
6.Syllable tierσCV-tierCCVSegmental tierlɪt’hard’Syllable tierσσCV-tierCVCVSegmental tiergoro’to draw’
This present study confined itself to only those dialectical differences that are realised as a result of change in the syllable structure.
2.5 Dholuo Suprasegmental Features
The supra segmental features mainly found in Dholuo are tone and stress.
2.5.1 Tone
Okombo (1977) investigated some aspects of the form and functions of tone in Dholuo and noted that the domain of tone is the word and that vowels are the tone bearing units. Tone plays a fundamental role in indicating a number of aspects including lexical differentiation, tense and word category distinction.
In another study, Okombo (1982:26) outlines three basic tone patterns. These are Low (L), High (H), and down stepped high. He further observes that a large number of Dholuo words have alternative tones but they are picked from a finite set of basic tone-patterns.
The following examples illustrate the tone patterns in Dholuo.
7.PatternPhonological PatternExampleLow (L)]-]wer /wer/’music’High (H)[/]lit /lɪt/’bereavement’Downstepped high (DH)[!/]muono /mwɔnɔ/ ‘smear’
This study focused on only tone based-dialectical features.
2.5.2 Stress
Katamba (1989:221) notes that stress is basically a matter of greater auditory prominence whose major phonetic components are pitch, length, and loudness. Thus, a stressed syllable tends to have higher pitch and is longer and louder than their unstressed counterparts. A stressed syllable also requires an increased respiratory energy in their articulation. It would also be imperative to note that vowels in stressed syllables have full vowel quality.
In Dholuo, stress in most cases falls on the stem vowel of a word and not on the affix, except a verb plural affix in the imperative (Owino 2003:59). The following words illustrate this;
8.Wit-ɪ/wɪtɪ/’throw away’ (imperative)Wuog-ɪ/wuogí/’leave’Rit-i/rití/’wait’Keth-i/kεƟí/’destroy’
In all these words stress falls on the final vowel of the last syllable.
There are various levels of stress such as word stress, sentence stress and emphatic stress, this research particularly focus on the word stress with an aim of assessing its role in dialectical variation within South Nyanza dialect.
2.6 Conclusion
This chapter has discussed the consonant and vowels of Dholuo. The study has shown that Dholuo sounds comprises twenty one pure consonants and five nasal stop compounds, and nine vowels as identified by Okombo (1982). A brief account of vowel processes has also been given in this chapter. The processes discussed are glide formation, vowel deletion, vowel harmony and lengthening.
It is noted that as a rule, high front vowel and high back vowel are realized as palatal glide and bilabial glide, respectively, when they precede a non-high vowel or a high vowel with the opposite value for the feature [+back]. It has also been shown that vowel deletion occurs in unstressed word final vowels and unstressed word internal positions. Vowel lengthening occurs in environments where a vowel precedes one or two consonants followed by either followed by either one or no vowel at all. The study has also shown that Dholuo infinitive suffix –o is realized as a [+ATR] or [-ATR] on depending on the root vowel. This is a case of vowel harmony.
Dholuo supra segmental features such as syllable, tone and stress are also discussed in the chapter. The study noted that Dholuo has both open and closed syllable structures and that vowels bear tone which indicate various grammatical aspects such as tense and word category. Dholuo also exhibits three tone patterns: Low, High and Downstepped. On stress, only stem vowels of a word and not the affix vowel is stressed. However, this rule does not affect a verb plural affix.
These processes were put into use in the subsequent chapter where the analysis of dialectical variation within South Nyanza dialect was carried out.
CHAPTER THREE
PHONOLOGICAL DIFFERENCES
3.1 Introduction
The concern of this chapter is to majorly provide the analysis of the samples of phonological features observed in data collected. The analysis is carried out within the framework of Variationist Theory. Variationist Theory as developed by Labov (1969) accounts for the linguistic differences that are observable, particularly, in terms of the contexts of their usage, and their distribution. The analysis done in this chapter is related to the first and second objectives whose aim is to establish the existence of phonological differences within South Nyanza dialect.
The discussion in this chapter begins with the analysis of the phonological differences established and zones in which they occur. The last section of the chapter examines the lexical features that define the sub varieties of South Nyanza dialect as was established in the data collected. The lexical features discussed here are classified into three categories for ease of analysis. These are cases of lexical items that are radically different in form but represent the same concept, lexical items that are similar in all aspects except pronunciation and finally, those that are borrowed from neighbouring languages as a result of contact.
3.2 Phonological Differences
Phonological differences are those differences that are realized as a result of differences in pronunciation. This feature is only significant when it is realized in a large set of words. In this section, the study set out to demonstrate the sub dialect zones that can be recognized on the basis of phonological properties.
It is important at this point to note that this study has borrowed the codes used by Oduol (1990) to indicate the status of both the phonological features identified in this chapter and chapter three respectively. These codes are: KN (known but not used), TP (typically used), OP (optionally used), and ABS (absent). It is also worth to note that some of the differences identified in this study are coincidentally similar to those used in Oduol (1990). However, in such situations, an attempt to provide an interpretation in light of the research problem underpinning this study and the methodology is made.
3.2.1 The /h/ Variable: The Occurrence Versus the Non-Occurrence of /h/ in
the Environment before a Vowel
The glottal fricative /h/ is distinct in some regions and absent in others. This variable defines three sub dialectical zones of South Nyanza dialect. In zone one, /h/ is ever present and is distinct in the pronunciation. In zone two, /h/ is optional while in zone three, it is totally absent. The region where /h/ is pronounced /h/ is Kisumu County. This can be attributed to their proximity and interaction with speakers of Boro-Ukwala dialect where /h/ is a common feature.
In zones where /h/ is optional is spoken in Nyakach, Nyando and Homa-bay. In zone three where /h/ is known but not used is spoken in Rongo and Migori. Table 3.1 demonstrate the occurrence of this variable.
Table 3.1: The /h/ Variable- Occurrence vs Non-Occurrence
GlossvariantsSouth Nyanza1South Nyanza2South Nyanza3SlopeholoTPOPABSoloABSOPTPCoughahondaTPOPABSaondaABSOPTPMysteryhonoTPOPABSonoABSOPTPLoveheraTPOPABSeraABSOPTPBlowinghukoTPOPABSukoABSOPABS
3.2.2. Variable /f/
Variable /f/ defines three sub dialectical areas; one where /f/ is pronounced /f/, another where /f/ is pronounced /h/ and a third one where /f/ is absent. Sub dialect one where /f/ is pronounced as /f/ is spoken in Muhoroni, Nyando, Nyakach, Mbita, and Homa-bay. Sub dialect two where /f/ is pronounced as /h/ is spoken in Seme and Kisumu while sub dialect three where is totally absent is spoken in Migori.
Table 3.2: Variable /f/ Pronounced as /f/, /h/ and /Ø/
GlossVariantSouth Nyanza1South Nyanza2South Nyanza3MousefukoTPABSABShukoABSTPABSukoABSABSTPFish (small)fuluTPABSABShuluABSTPABSuluABSABSTPCoughingfuoloTPABSABShuoloABSTPABSuoloABSABSTPRainbowlifuduTPABSABSlihuduABSTPABSliuduABSABSTPFlyfuyoTPABSABShuyoABSTPABSuyoABSABSTP
3.2.3 Variable /j/: The Occurrence Versus Non-Occurrence of /j/ in the
Environment before a Back Vowel
The palatal approximant /j/ is present in some varieties while absent in others. In the varieties where it is absent, /j/ is deleted when it precedes a back vowel. This variable distinguishes two sub dialect areas. The first one is where /j/ is typically pronounced /j/ and is spoken in Seme, Kisumu, Nyando, Nyakach, Muhoroni Oyugis, Mbita and Homabay. The second one where /j/ is pronounced as /Ø/ (deleted before a back vowel) is spoken in Rongo and Awendo
Table 3.3: Variable /j/GlossVariantSouth Nyanza1South Nyanza2SqueezediyoTPABSdioABSTPSevenabiriyoTPABSabrioABSTPFertilemiyoTPABSmioABSTPBoywuoyiTPABSwuoiABSTPThirstriyoTPABSrioABSTPTo suckchiyoTPABSchioABSTP
3.2.4 Root Vowel Length Variable
Okombo (1982) observes that typically, Dholuo vowels are phonemically short. However, he further notes that there is a rule that yields a long vowel when a vowel precedes one or two consonants followed by either one or no vowel in word final position in an utterance. In contexts where a word ends in a consonant, it is the last vowel that is lengthened whereas in vowel final word, the rule affects the second last vowel (Oduol 1990:59).
The variation in root-vowel lengthening defines two sub dialect areas within South Nyanza dialect; one where the root vowel lengthening rule always applies and another where it applies optionally. South Nyanza1 where the root-vowel is always lengthened is spoken in Kisumu, Muhoroni, Nyando, Nyakach, Homabay, Mbita, Oyugis and Migori. South Nyanza2 where the root-vowel lengthening rule applies optionally is spoken in Rongo and Awendo, especially, the regions neighbouring Mugirango of Kisii county. Table 3.4 demonstrates the root-vowel lengthening variable.
Table 3.4: Root-Lengthening VariableGlossVariantsSouth Nyanza1South Nyanza2Thorn/kuðɔ/KNOP/ku:ðɔ/TPKNWailing/nduru/KNOP/ndu:ru/TPKNChair/kɔm/KNOP/kɔ:m/TPKNCloth/nanɡaKNOP/na:nɡa/TPKNVegetable/alɔt/KNOP/alɔ:t/TPKNPot/aɡulu /KNOP/aɡu:lu/TPKNPumpkin/buðo/KNOP/bu:ðo/TPKN37
3.2.5 Variable /w/
The bilabial approximant /w/ is sometimes pronounced /w/ while in others it is deleted word medially when it occurs between a consonant and a high front vowel /i/. Oduol (1990: 58) observes that this variable defines two dialectical areas of Dholuo: Boro-Ukwala dialect where /w/ is pronounced as /w/ and South Nyanza dialect where /w/ is pronounced as /Ø/ between a consonant and /i/.
However, this study established that even within South Nyanza dialect of Dholuo, variation with regard variable /w/ still exist. In South Nyanza1 /w/ is typically pronounced as /w/ and is spoken in Kisumu, Nyando, Seme, and Nyakach. South Nyanza2 where /w/ is deleted between a consonant and a high front vowel /i/ is spoken in Homabay, Mbita, Rongo, Migori and Oyugis as shown in table 3.5 below.
Table 3.5: Variable /w/- The Occurrence vs Non-Occurrence of /w/
GlossVariantSouth Nyanza1South Nyanza2HarshkinyKNTPkwinyTPKNRight handachichKNTPachwichTPKNOozechiroKNTPchwiroTPABSWhistleliyoKNTPlwiyoTPABSPoisonkiriKNTPkwiriTPKNBlowing nosethinyoKNTPthwinyoTPABS38
3.2.6 Variable /i/
The high front vowel /i/ is in some utterance deleted when it occurs in the environment before /j/ while in others it is always present. The deletion of /i/ when it precedes /j/ normally occurs in rapid speech in the variety in which it occurs. As with variable /w/, this variable is also elaborately discussed in Oduol (1990). According to (Oduol 1990:51), variable /i/ is typically spoken as /i/ in Oyugis and Kendu divisions while deleted before /j/ in Boro-Ukwala dialect.
However, this study found that this variable marks two sub dialects of South Nyanza dialect. In South Nyanza1 where /i/ is typically pronounced as /i/ in the environment before /j/ is spoken in Homabay, and Mbita. In South Nyanza2, where /i/ is deleted is spoken in Seme, Kisumu, Nyakach and Rongo and Oyugis. The occurrence in Seme, Kisumu and Nyakach is attributed to the influence of Boro-Ukwala dialect which they neighbor while the situation in Oyugis and Rongo is as a result of the influence of the rapid speech of the Ekegusii which they neighbour.
3.2.7 Conclusion
In this section, a discussion of the phonological features is done. The study established that phonological differences that are define sub dialects of South Nyanza dialect occur in different contexts. There are those that occur as a result of deletion of a segment in the other varieties. These include the glottal fricative /h/ which is typically pronounced /h/ in the entire Seme, Kisumu East, Kisumu Central and Kisumu West, optional in Nyakach, Nyando, and Homabay. The same sound /h/ is absent in Rongo and Awendo of Migori county. The other variable is sound /f/ which is realized as /f/ in Muhoroni, Nyando, Nyakach, Mbita and Homabay, /h/ in Seme, Kisumu East, Kisumu West, and Kisumu Central. The same sound /f/ is absent in the same contexts in Rongo and Awendo.
The study also established that the occurrence and non-occurrence of the palatal glide in the environment before a back vowel also marks the sub dialects of South Nyanza dialect. It marks two sub dialect zones. One is where it is typically pronounced as /j/ and is spoken in Seme, Kisumu East, Kisumu West, Kisumu Central, Nyando, Nyakach, Muhoroni, Oyugis, Homabay and Mbita. However, in Rongo and Awendo, /j/ is absent. Root vowel lengthening and the presence and absence of bilabial glide /w/ also define sub dialects of South Nyanza dialect of Dholuo. The deletion of high front vowel in the environment before a palatal glide also distinguishes the sub dialects of South Nyanza dialect.
CHAPTER FOUR
THE ENVIRONMENT OF DIALECTAL DIFFERENCES IN
SOUTH NYANZA DHOLUO DIALECT
4.1 Introduction
This chapter aims at providing a description of the occurrence of the phonological differences identified in chapter three of this study. Tagliamonte (2012:19) posits that accountability is essential since it enables the researcher to determine how a variant is influenced by a particular type of context compared to another.
4.2 Phonological Differences
In this section, we have provided explanations to the various differences in pronunciations that characterize the sub dialects of South Nyanza dialect of Dholuo.
4.2.1 The Occurrence and Non-Occurrence of /h/
As we have noted above, in chapter three, there are three sub dialects characterized by the occurrence and non-occurrence of the glottal fricative /h/. One is where /h/ is pronounced as /h/, the second one is where /h/ is optional and the third one is where /h/ is completely deleted. Where /h/ is pronounced as /h/ covers regions such as Seme, and Kisumu as shown in map one in the appendix. The heavy presence of this sound in these regions can be attributed to their close associations with the Luhya speaking communities which they border. The sound is common in so many Luhya words. The influence is also indirect as a result of the interaction between these speakers and the speakers of Boro-Ukwala dialect who commonly use this sound, for example, oliho (cooking stick) and, sihoho (witchcraft of the eye) etc.
The same sound /h/ is optional, that is, it can either be pronounced or deleted altogether in a speech in some sub dialect. This is found in Nyakach, Homabay Mbita, Kano of Nyando subcounty and Muhoroni. It is mostly deleted in rapid speech. /h/ is completely deleted in sub dialect three which covers Kamagambo of Rongo sub county, and Sakwa in Awendo subcounty of Migori county. However, the study did not discover any discernible context under which this deletion occurs. Map 3 shows the regions where this deletion occurs.
4.2.2 The Development of /f/
This variable marks three sub dialect zones-where /f/ is pronounced as /f/, where /f/ is pronounced as /h/ and where /f/ is deleted. The first one is typically spoken in Kano of Nyando subcounty, Muhoroni, Nyakach, Mbita, Homabay and Oyugis as shown in map 1 and 2 in the appendix. The second zone is where /f/ is pronounced as /h/ and covers Seme and Kisumu. As we have noted in 4.2.1, above, this region prefer /h/ to /f/ as a result of the influence of the Luhya dialects which are commonly characterized by /h/ sound. In zone three, both /h/ and /f/ are known but are not typically used especially in rapid speech. This covers Rongo and Awendo. The variation is therefore as a result of the influence of the other languages such as Lumarachi, Luugoli and Ekegusii that are in contact with South Nyanza dialect. Variation can be realized as a result of such contact.
4.2.3 The Deletion of Palatal Approximant /j/ Variable
This also defines two dialectical zones. One is where /j/ is pronounced as /j/ and another where it is pronounced as /Ø/ (deleted). Where /j/ is typically pronounced as /j/ typically occurs in Seme, Kisumu, Nyando, Muhoroni, Nyakach, Oyugis Mbita and Homabay. This sound is deleted when it precedes a mid high back vowel in rapid speech and it occurs in Rongo and Awendo of Migori Sub County. These two regions neighbour Ekegusii speaking community who speak relatively fast and may have influenced them. In the variationist theory, language can vary as a result of the experience that its speakers have had. The deletion of the palatal glide therefore occurs as a result of the influence that Ekegusii has had on the South Nyanza dialect especially on those who immediately border them.
4.2.4 The Development of Root Vowel Lengthening Variable
This marks two sub dialect zones: one is where the feature hardly applies and another where it applies. The first one where root vowel lengthening hardly applies runs through Seme, Kisumu, Nyando, Muhoroni, Nyakach, Mbita and Homabay. The second zone where root vowel lengthening hardly occurs runs through Oyugis and Kamagambo, and Sakwa of Rongo and Awendo sub counties respectively.
4.2.5 The Deletion of /w/ Word Medially
The bilabial approximant /w/ marks two zones of South Nyanza dialect. One is where it is pronounced as /w/ and another one is where it is deleted when it precedes a high front vowel /i/. Where /w/ is pronounced as /w/ runs through Seme, Kisumu, Nyando, Muhoroni, and Nyakach while the deletion of /w/ in the environment before a high vowel occurs in Homabay, Mbita, Oyugis, Rongo and Awendo.
4.2.6 Vowel Deletion Variable
In this study, we only established internal vowel deletion process: the deletion of a high front vowel /i/ in the environment before a palatal approximant /j/. This feature also characterizes two zones of South Nyanza dialect. The first one is where /i/ is pronounced /i/ and runs through Homabay, Oyugis, and Mbita while the one in which the high front vowel /i/ is deleted occurs in Seme, Kisumu, Nyando, Muhoroni, Nyakach, Rongo and Sakwa of Awendo sub county. The deletion often occurs in a rapid speech. This deletion is occasioned by the influence of Ekegusii and BU which are relatively faster than typical South Nyanza dialect.
4.2.7 Reconciliation of Phonological Sub Dialect Features
In light of the foregoing discussion above, the phonological features established in this study characterize three sub dialect zones of South Nyanza dialect, described here as South Nyanza1, South Nyanza2 and South Nyanza3. South Nyanza1 covers Seme, Kisumu, Nyando and Muhoroni. South Nyanza2 is composed of Homabay, Mbita and Oyugis while South Nyanza3 is made up of Kamagambo and Sakwa of Migori County.
4.3.Conclusion
In this chapter, explanations to the various phonological differences observed in South Nyanza dialect are provided. The study established that the phonological differences- deletion, root lengthening, glide formation- occur due to the influence that the neighbouring speech communities have on the speakers of South Nyanza dialect with whom they are in contact. The glottal fricative /h/ observed in South Nyanza1 is as a result of indirect borrowing from luugoli and limarachi through Boro-Ukwala dialect. The deletion of a high front vowel /i/ in the environment before a palatal approximant /j/ observed in Rongo and Awendo is established to be as a result of the contact with a relatively faster Ekegusii they neighbor. The deletion majorly occurs in a rapid speech.
CHAPTER FIVE
SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
5.1 Introduction
The purpose of this chapter is to provide a summary, conclusion and recommendation for further research. To achieve these, the study has revisited the research hypotheses formulated for this study, examining them on the basis of the research findings and the discussions made in the four chapters of this study. The recommendations for further research are suggested in the last section of this chapter.
5.2 Summary
The main objective of this study was to establish the phonological features that characterize South Nyanza dialect of Dholuo. The analysis was done within the framework of Variationist Theory originally proposed by Labov (1963) as the most adequate theory for studying language variation. To enable us to give a systematic discussion of our findings, one of the principles, the principle of accountability, was particularly used to account for the occurrence and usage of the various phonological differences established in the study.
An expository background to the study was provided at beginning of this report. This was a study of the phonological differences in the South Nyanza dialect of Dholuo. The research problem revolved around the need to establish the sub dialects of South Nyanza dialect of Dholuo. The study was guided by the following questions: What are the phonological differences within South Nyanza dialect of Dholuo? What are the factors responsible for the phonological differences within the South Nyanza dialect? In which environments do these differences occur? The study sought to establish the phonological differences in the South Nyanza dialect of Dholuo and identify the environments in which these differences occur. For the analysis of data, the study adopted Variationist Theory.
A discussion of Dholuo consonant and vowel sounds in general and Dholuo vowel processes in particular was made. The aim was to provide a phonological background on which the phonological discussions in the subsequent chapters would be done. Vowel processes such as root lengthening and deletion were established to be responsible for the phonological differences observed in South Nyanza dialect. Various segmental feature such as syllable, tone and stress were also discussed. However, the analysis did not include these phonological features as they were outside the scope of the study.
Phonological differences such as /h/, /f/, /w/, root vowel lengthening, and vowel deletion and glide formation were identified as the phonological features that mark the sub-dialect of South Nyanza dialect of Dholuo. The study also established that the lexical features that Sub Dialects of South Nyanza dialect fall, into three broad categories: lexical items radically different in form but represent the same concept, those that are similar in all respects except pronunciation, and finally, those that are occur as a result of borrowing from neighbouring communities.
An attempt was made to relate and classify these features according to the zones in which they occur. From the discussion, we noted that there are three major sub dialect Zones of South Nyanza dialect. These are Seme, Kisumu, Nyando, Muhoroni, and Nyakach, Oyugis, Homabay, and Mbita, and the third one is Rongo and Awendo of Migori County.
With regard to the environment of occurrence of the phonological differences within South Nyanza dialect, the study established that the linguistic differences that mark the sub varieties of South Nyanza occur under different linguistic environments
5.3 Conclusion
The study set out to test three hypotheses. The first hypotheses was that South Nyanza dialect has phonological differences that are regionally distributed. The findings of the study as demonstrated in chapter three shows that phonological differences exist within the South Nyanza dialect and that such differences are geographically distributed. These are South Nyanza1 comprising Seme, Kisumu, Muhoroni, Nyando and Nyakach; South Nyanza2 comprising Oyugis, Homabay, and Mbita; and South Nyanza3 comprising Rongo and Awendo of Migori county. This hypothesis was therefore adopted.
The second hypothesis was that the contact between the South Nyanza dialect speakers and speakers of other neighbouring languages is responsible for the phonological differences in South Nyanza dialect. From the discussion, it was established that the phonological differences that set South Nyanza1 (Seme, Kisumu, Muhoroni, Nyando and Nyakach) from the rest is as a result of the heavy influence from the speakers of Boro-Ukwala dialect with whom they constantly interact and neighbor.
The hypothesis that the contact between the speakers of South Nyanza dialect and speakers of neighbouring languages is responsible for the phonological differences observed was therefore found to be valid.
5.4 Recommendation for Further Research
Since the scope of this study did not cover the entire Migori county, particularly with regard to the influence that the neighboring communities such as the Massai and the Kuria might have on the speakers of South Nyanza dialect neighboring them, we recommend that a similar study be carried to determine the extent to which this contact might influence Dholuo spoken in this region. This should cover even the other communities who live amongst the Dholuo speakers in Migori such as the Somali and Maragoli.
My study concentrated only on the phonological differences. In light of this, we suggest that a further research be carried out to investigate differences in other linguistic aspects such as morphology, semantics, grammar and syntax within South Nyanza dialect.
A study should also be carried out to establish the sociolinguistic factors that has made borrowing from Kipsigis and Nandi less productive though the two speech communities are in contact.
REFERENCES
Chambers, J. K. (2009). Sociolinguistic Theory: Linguistic Variation and its Social Significance. Rev.ed. Chichester: West Sussex: A John Wiley & Sons, Ltd, 1981-1984.
Greenberg,J.(1995)Studies in African Linguistics Branford Connctitivut:Compass Publishing Company.
Huntingford, G. W. (1959).Elementary Lessons in Dholuo: School of Oriental and African Studies. London: University of London.
Hyman, L. M. (1975). Phonology: Theory and Analysis. Harcourt: Harcourt College Pub.
Labov, W. (1969). “Contraction, deletion, and inherent variability of the English copula.” Language, 45: 715-762.
Labov, W. and Waletzky, J. (1997). Narrative Analysis: Oral Versions of Personal Experience. New York: Academic Press
Langacker, R. W. (1986). “An Introduction to Cognitive Grammar.” Cognitive Science, 10(1), 1-40.
Levon, E. (2011). “Teasing Apart to Bring Together: Gender and Sexuality in Variationist Research.” American Speech, 86(1), 69-84.
Mesthrie, R., Swann, J., Deumert, A., and Leap, W. (2000). Introducing sociolinguistics. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
Ochieng, J. A. (2012). Dholuo Dialect: A Comparative of Dialectal Variation with Boro-Ukwala Dialect. (Unpublished MA Project). Nairobi: University of Nairobi.
Odhiambo, J. H. A. (1981). Dholuo Phonology: A Study of the Major Vowel Processes. (Unpublished M.A. Dissertation). Nairobi: University of Nairobi.
Oduor, J. A. N. (2002). A Study of Syllable Weight and its Effects in Dholuo Phonology. (Unpublished Ph. D Thesis). Nairobi: University of Nairobi.
Okombo, D. O. (1977). Some Aspects of Form and Function of Tone in Luo. Nairobi. (Unpublished B. A Dissertation). Nairobi: University of Nairobi.
Owino, D. (2003). Phonological Nativization of Dholuo Loanword. (Unpublished M.A Thesis). Nairobi: University of Nairobi.
Sankoff, D. (1988). Variable Rules. Sociolinguistics: An international handbook of the science of language and society, 2, 984-995. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Stafford, R. L. (1967). An Elementary Luo Grammar. Nairobi: Oxford University press.
Yamo, J. O. (2014). Loan Word Adaptation in Boro-Ukwala: A case of Borrowing from Lumarachi, Lunyala and Kiswahili. (Unpublished M.A Dissertation). Nairobi: University of Nairobi.