Here is some additional information I
received from the requester when specifically asked about the issue of
treating Khasi as a macrolanguage:
from "The War-Jaintia in Bangladesh:
a sociolinguistic survey"
“ 'Generally speaking, ‘Khasi’
is a generic name given to the people of the Khasi and Jaintia Hill'
(Giri, 6).
The Khasis of whom these words are
spoken are Mongoloid in physical features, matrilineal in society, and,
since the mid-19th century, mostly Christian in religion...
The Khasi people of Bangladesh see themselves as no different than the
Khasi in India about whom those words were spoken. They say that
they belong to the one race or ethnic group of people who live in the Khasi
Hills and the Jaintia Hills and make no further ethnic distinctions: they
are Khasi, whether they say they speak W-J, Lamin, Nongtalang, Pnar, Lyngngam,
Synteng, Darang, etc."....(p 10)
"Second, there’s been some
question as to whether Lyngngam can linguistically be considered to be
of the same language as Khasi, in spite of their speakers’ close ethnic
identification as Khasi (Grimes, 394). " (p 11)
**************************************************************************
from "The Status of Lyngngam"
by K.S. Nagaraja
"The Lyngngam speech form
is spoken in the northwestern parts of the Khasi hills in Meghalaya state
of India. Since Grierson's work (1904), Lyngngam has been considered as
one of the dialects of Khasi. Only recently, that is in the late eighties,
one scholar named Hamlet Bareh, a Khasi speaker, doubted the appropriateness
of this classification. In his work, Barah has provided a few lexical items
to make his point. After that, so far no work has discussed this issue.
In the direction of filling this gap some data was collected by the present
author in 1988 on this speech variety. Though this data is not sufficient
for a detailed comparative study, it is still hoped that the various aspects
of this speech variety presented below will show many interesting features
about lyngngam and Khasi."
***************************************************************************************
then there is this from an article
at http://goliath.ecnext.com/coms2/gi_0199-3738926/Genetic-diversity-and-relationships-among.html
'The seven Khasi tribes live in
the Khasi and Jaintia hills, and the Garo live in the Garo hills of Meghalaya;
the two groups' geographic distributions do not overlap. Distribution of
particularly the Lyngngam in the West Khasi hills is in close proximity
and contiguous to the Garo hills inhabited by the Garo. As a result, although
the Khasi refer to the Lyngngam as Lyngngam or Langam and consider them
as belonging to one of their own groups, the Garo call them Megam and treat
them as part of one of the 12 subtribes of the Garo. Their ethnic identity
therefore is in dispute, although their language is more akin to the Khasi's"
**************************************
from http://www.sehd.org/reports-features/lyngam.doc.
Lyngam—A People Associated with Khasi Identity
By Munni Mree
[this refers to Lyngam of Bangladesh - bw]
The Lyngam [also spelt Lyngngam], an ethnic community concentrated in Kalmakanda Upazila of Netrokona District, is associated with the Khas identity. The Garos call them Megam...
They are “supposed to have Garo origins, but have embraced Khasi customs. The Lyngngams speak a dialect of their own. Some traditions point out to Garo-Khasi intermixture in the Lyngngams territory” (Bareh 1985: 10). Their physical features and linguistic peculiarities suggest that the Lyngams are an Austro-Asiatic people belonging to the ethno-linguistic family of the Mon-Khmer communities...[that would be Khasi-related - bw]
Although language clearly differentiates the Lyngams from the Mandis [Garo], both peoples share similar food habits, behavior, family systems and kinship affairs...
Although the Lyngam are associated with the Khasi community, there is confusion among the people of Kalmakanda about their identity due to their alienation from the larger part of the Khasi community. Being unaware of their anthropological history, some members of the Lyngam community even believe themselves to be part of the Garo community. However, they do not think that they belong to the two large Abeng or Atong groups of the Garo community; they mistakenly think they are a separate group among the Garos.
“Except for the linguistic difference, the food habit, life style, costume and ornaments of the Lyngam community are almost identical to those of the Garo community. That is why we consider ourselves part of the Garo community. But we are not Garo, we are Lyngam,” says Ms. Preetilota Nongura, assistant headmistress of Baruakona School.
**************************************************************************************
And this from "Three Matrilineal
Groups of Assam: A study in Similarities and Differences by U.R. Ehrenfels
in American Anthropologist, New Series, Vol. 57, No. 2, Part 1 (Apr.,
1955), pp. 306-321
.
"Some aspects of the ethnography of the Lyngngam-Khasi are here presented
with a view to discussing the irregular distribution of similarities and
differences between them and the other Khasis to the east, on the one hand,
and the Garos to the west, on the other...It should be noted from the outset
that Lyngngams and other Khasis form, with the Garos, a solid matrilineal
area in central Assam, India. But while Lyngngam and other Khasis belong
to one linguistic group, Garos are part of another. On the other hand,
Lyngngams appear to be more similar to the Garos than to their Khasi linguistic
conationals in physical features, in economy, technology, and in ritual,
though not in the philosophicodogmatic frame of their religion. The uneven
distribution of these similarities and differences poses problems of integration
and historicity."
**********************************************************************************
{end of materials from requester}
With regard to general treatment of
splits:
>(You haven't
generally handled splits by changing the existing entity's scope from I
to M.)
In general, the JAC has not
moved to consider any split to a Part 2 code element since Part 3 has been
adopted. I would not have bothered the JAC with this request if [kha]
were not a Part 2 code element.
Suggesting that there is a single prototypical
macrolanguage situation is rather at odds with a significant number of
applications of it currently in the standard (e.g Dogri, Gondi, Komi)
-Joan
| Milicent K Wewerka <[log in to unmask]>
Sent by: ISO 639 Joint Advisory Committee <[log in to unmask]> 2008-02-15 06:54 AM
|
|