To Start the blog...

Eastern Shona Origins and linguistic classifications.

It is now accepted following numerous archaeological investigations that the Zimbabwe culture developed from the Gumanye Culture, which in turn developed from and was a successor to the Mupungubwe /K2 culture based on the upper Limpopo Valley near to the present borders of Zimbabwe, Botswana and South Africa.
From Great Zimbabwe itself the culture spread out far and wide, to the Zambezi Valley, the Zimbabwean Plateau, Moçambque between the Zambeze and the Limpopo and finally to the most northern parts of South Africa. The expansions of the culture was associated with an expansion of Shona-speaking people, or perhaps Shona-speaking ruling lineages. This expansion may, or may not, have resulted in language change.
Before any arguments are developed we should note that a change in archaeological assemblages do not necessarily mean a change in language, or for that matter the physical population.
Prior to the 1980s, the Shona language, or the Shona group of dialects were generally classified on their own and placed in an intermediate group between the Eastern Bantu Group — which includes Nyanja/Chewa and Sena — and the South East Bantu group — Shona Venda, Tsonga, Nguni and Sotho/Tswana.
However, since the early 1980s, and perhaps concurrently with the increasing archaeological work and the discoveries linking the origins of the Zimbabwe / Gumanye Culture in the south, the Shona language itself has been placed by most authorities in the South (East) Bantu Group. This I query, at this stage more on empirical and anecdotal grounds rather than on qualified research.
Linguistic Affinities Shona and its Dialects
Shona is essentially a group of closely related dialects, thee principal ones being;
• Karanga in the Masvingo Province of Zimbabwe;
• Zezezuru in the Central parts of Mashonaland in Zimbabwe;
• Korekore and Tavara in northern Zimbabwe and adjoining parts of Moçambique;
• Manyika in eastern Zimbabwe and neighbouring parts of Moçambique and here including some Báruè;
• Tewe (Teve) in Moçambique;
• Ndau in Moçambique and South East Zimbabwe;
• And finally Kalanga in South West Zimbabwe and neighbouring parts of Botswana.
Ndau and Kalanga differ more from standard Shona than the other dialects and may have, have had, links with other languages.
Standard Shona was developed in the colonial period and was based principally on the Karanga and Zezezuru dialects, but it is now spoken and written throughout Zimbabwe and used on the Zimbabwe Broadcasting Corporation. In Moçambique the Shona dialects have retained more of their identity and Báruè (Barwe), Manica (Manyika), Tewe and Ndau are recognised as separate, if related, languages and are all used in broadcasts in Radio Moçambique's regional services. Shona orthography differs in Moçambique as the Portuguese alphabet is employed as opposed to the English but this is really the result of separate colonial experiences. .
The neighbouring languages to Shona in the north and east, all belong to the Eastern Bantu linguistic group are;
• The various Zambian languages to the north of the Zambeze;
• Senga in the Zumbo area;
• Nyanja/Chewa in the area to the north of the Zambeze between Zumbo and Tete;
• Nhungwe in the Tete Changara Area;
• Sena in the Tambara Chemba Areas;
• And Sena/Tonga/Bangue
South between Beira and the Rio Save Shona (Ndau or Sanga) is spoken along the coast and even south of the river towards Vilancoulos. The Boundaries between Shona and the Southern Bantu group of languages are
• Tsonga (here the Tswa and Hlengwe dialects) roughly along the Save and Runde Rivers (but not always), and then goes across country to the Bubye and Limpopo Rivers.
• A small number of Venda-speaking people are found to the north of the Limpopo and Shona (Kalanga) is spoken in NE Botswana. [Perhaps a map should be inserted here].
These linguistic boundaries have not always been static. There is for example evidence than Shona was far more widely spoken in the southern east of the area prior to the Hlengwe advance in the late eighteenth century. In these areas the boundaries between Shona and some neighbouring languages are very well defined, and can be very sudden. One village may speak Shona and the next another language. This is especially the case in the southwest along the Shona / Tsonga divide and is clearly the result of a comparatively recent migration of the Hlengwe and Tswa into what was formally Shona-speaking country. The two languages are not mutually comprehendible.
However, in the north and east Shona appears to blend into other languages far more gradually. It appears to me that this is generally where Shona dialects come into contact with eastern Bantu languages, that is Chewa/Nyanja, Nhungwe, and Sena/Tonga, especially the latter. The Báruè language is generally recognised as a Shona-related dialect, indeed, in the west of the area where it is spoken it is very close to Manica, but in the east and north Sena / Tonga and Nhungwe become more evident. It would appear to me that this indicates a long relationship between eastern Shona and these languages.
I have asked many central and eastern Shona-speakers, which languages it is easier for them to understand, (assuming that they have no prior knowledge of these languages), the Nyanja Sena languages, on the one hand, and the southeast Bantu Group of languages on the other hand. In all cases they have replied that the Nyanja Sena group are easier to understand. A number of very common words that are used in Shona and the northern languages, for example ‘iwe’, are not found as far as I am aware in the southeast group. [More examples needed here]
I suspect that Shona is more an intermediate language between the Eastern Bantu Group of languages and the South (Eastern) Group of languages and that the former classification reflected a truer picture of the actual relationship between Shona and the eastern and south Bantu linguistic groups than the current one. Of course all the languages discussed are fairly closely related, nevertheless the actual relationships between the languages can help to solve both historical and archaeological problems.
Eastern Shona Origins and linguistic classifications.
It is now accepted following numerous archaeological investigations that the Zimbabwe culture developed from the Gumanye Culture, which in turn developed from and was a successor to the Mupungubwe /K2 culture based on the upper Limpopo Valley near to the present borders of Zimbabwe, Botswana and South Africa.
From Great Zimbabwe itself the culture spread out far and wide, to the Zambezi Valley, the Zimbabwean Plateau, Moçambque between the Zambeze and the Limpopo and finally to the most northern parts of South Africa. The expansions of the culture was associated with an expansion of Shona-speaking people, or perhaps Shona-speaking ruling lineages. This expansion may, or may not, have resulted in language change.
Before any arguments are developed we should note that a change in archaeological assemblages do not necessarily mean a change in language, or for that matter the physical population.
Prior to the 1980s, the Shona language, or the Shona group of dialects were generally classified on their own and placed in an intermediate group between the Eastern Bantu Group — which includes Nyanja/Chewa and Sena — and the South East Bantu group — Shona Venda, Tsonga, Nguni and Sotho/Tswana.
However, since the early 1980s, and perhaps concurrently with the increasing archaeological work and the discoveries linking the origins of the Zimbabwe / Gumanye Culture in the south, the Shona language itself has been placed by most authorities in the South (East) Bantu Group. This I query, at this stage more on empirical and anecdotal grounds rather than on qualified research.
Linguistic Affinities Shona and its Dialects
Shona is essentially a group of closely related dialects, thee principal ones being;
• Karanga in the Masvingo Province of Zimbabwe;
• Zezezuru in the Central parts of Mashonaland in Zimbabwe;
• Korekore and Tavara in northern Zimbabwe and adjoining parts of Moçambique;
• Manyika in eastern Zimbabwe and neighbouring parts of Moçambique and here including some Báruè;
• Tewe (Teve) in Moçambique;
• Ndau in Moçambique and South East Zimbabwe;
• And finally Kalanga in South West Zimbabwe and neighbouring parts of Botswana.
Ndau and Kalanga differ more from standard Shona than the other dialects and may have, have had, links with other languages.
Standard Shona was developed in the colonial period and was based principally on the Karanga and Zezezuru dialects, but it is now spoken and written throughout Zimbabwe and used on the Zimbabwe Broadcasting Corporation. In Moçambique the Shona dialects have retained more of their identity and Báruè (Barwe), Manica (Manyika), Tewe and Ndau are recognised as separate, if related, languages and are all used in broadcasts in Radio Moçambique's regional services. Shona orthography differs in Moçambique as the Portuguese alphabet is employed as opposed to the English but this is really the result of separate colonial experiences. .
The neighbouring languages to Shona in the north and east, all belong to the Eastern Bantu linguistic group are;
• The various Zambian languages to the north of the Zambeze;
• Senga in the Zumbo area;
• Nyanja/Chewa in the area to the north of the Zambeze between Zumbo and Tete;
• Nhungwe in the Tete Changara Area;
• Sena in the Tambara Chemba Areas;
• And Sena/Tonga/Bangue
South between Beira and the Rio Save Shona (Ndau or Sanga) is spoken along the coast and even south of the river towards Vilancoulos. The Boundaries between Shona and the Southern Bantu group of languages are
• Tsonga (here the Tswa and Hlengwe dialects) roughly along the Save and Runde Rivers (but not always), and then goes across country to the Bubye and Limpopo Rivers.
• A small number of Venda-speaking people are found to the north of the Limpopo and Shona (Kalanga) is spoken in NE Botswana. [Perhaps a map should be inserted here].
These linguistic boundaries have not always been static. There is for example evidence than Shona was far more widely spoken in the southern east of the area prior to the Hlengwe advance in the late eighteenth century. In these areas the boundaries between Shona and some neighbouring languages are very well defined, and can be very sudden. One village may speak Shona and the next another language. This is especially the case in the southwest along the Shona / Tsonga divide and is clearly the result of a comparatively recent migration of the Hlengwe and Tswa into what was formally Shona-speaking country. The two languages are not mutually comprehendible.
However, in the north and east Shona appears to blend into other languages far more gradually. It appears to me that this is generally where Shona dialects come into contact with eastern Bantu languages, that is Chewa/Nyanja, Nhungwe, and Sena/Tonga, especially the latter. The Báruè language is generally recognised as a Shona-related dialect, indeed, in the west of the area where it is spoken it is very close to Manica, but in the east and north Sena / Tonga and Nhungwe become more evident. It would appear to me that this indicates a long relationship between eastern Shona and these languages.
I have asked many central and eastern Shona-speakers, which languages it is easier for them to understand, (assuming that they have no prior knowledge of these languages), the Nyanja Sena languages, on the one hand, and the southeast Bantu Group of languages on the other hand. In all cases they have replied that the Nyanja Sena group are easier to understand. A number of very common words that are used in Shona and the northern languages, for example ‘iwe’, are not found as far as I am aware in the southeast group. [More examples needed here]
I suspect that Shona is more an intermediate language between the Eastern Bantu Group of languages and the South (Eastern) Group of languages and that the former classification reflected a truer picture of the actual relationship between Shona and the eastern and south Bantu linguistic groups than the current one. Of course all the languages discussed are fairly closely related, nevertheless the actual relationships between the languages can help to solve both historical and archaeological problems.


Any comments?