Kin terms in Karitiana and how they may contribute to the reconstruction of Proto-Tupian kin terminology
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2019 |
Tipo de documento: | Artigo |
Idioma: | eng |
Título da fonte: | Boletim do Museu Paraense Emílio Goeldi. Ciências Humanas |
Texto Completo: | http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1981-81222019000100121 |
Resumo: | Abstract This paper reports a case study that discusses issues related to the reconstruction of kinship terminology in Proto-Tupi, based on previous work by Araújo and Storto (2002) on the Arikém and Juruna subfamilies. It also presents the remaining kin terminology of the Karitiana language (Arikém branch or subfamily) which was not discussed in the case study. Comparing Karitiana (Landin, 1989) and Juruna (Lima, 1995) kin terminology, Araújo and Storto (2002) have shown that some cognates can be found in the two languages and proposed that they reconstruct in Proto-Tupi. These authors claim that these reconstructed items indicate the following hypotheses: (1) the speakers of Proto-Tupi (4500 BP) had a Dravidian kinship system; (2) the speakers of Proto-Tupi had a kinship and naming system in which ego was equated with the paternal grandparent of the same sex as ego. Besides the 11 cognates discussed by Araújo and Storto (2002), we discuss the remaining 19 kin terms that form the Karitiana kinship system according to Landin (1989). |
id |
MPEG-2_fc5bcad19adcc16911c83afefd75e82f |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:scielo:S1981-81222019000100121 |
network_acronym_str |
MPEG-2 |
network_name_str |
Boletim do Museu Paraense Emílio Goeldi. Ciências Humanas |
repository_id_str |
|
spelling |
Kin terms in Karitiana and how they may contribute to the reconstruction of Proto-Tupian kin terminologyKaritianaArikémJurunaTupiKinshipReconstructionAbstract This paper reports a case study that discusses issues related to the reconstruction of kinship terminology in Proto-Tupi, based on previous work by Araújo and Storto (2002) on the Arikém and Juruna subfamilies. It also presents the remaining kin terminology of the Karitiana language (Arikém branch or subfamily) which was not discussed in the case study. Comparing Karitiana (Landin, 1989) and Juruna (Lima, 1995) kin terminology, Araújo and Storto (2002) have shown that some cognates can be found in the two languages and proposed that they reconstruct in Proto-Tupi. These authors claim that these reconstructed items indicate the following hypotheses: (1) the speakers of Proto-Tupi (4500 BP) had a Dravidian kinship system; (2) the speakers of Proto-Tupi had a kinship and naming system in which ego was equated with the paternal grandparent of the same sex as ego. Besides the 11 cognates discussed by Araújo and Storto (2002), we discuss the remaining 19 kin terms that form the Karitiana kinship system according to Landin (1989).MCTI/Museu Paraense Emílio Goeldi2019-04-01info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersiontext/htmlhttp://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1981-81222019000100121Boletim do Museu Paraense Emílio Goeldi. Ciências Humanas v.14 n.1 2019reponame:Boletim do Museu Paraense Emílio Goeldi. Ciências Humanasinstname:Museu Paraense Emílio Goeldi (MPEG)instacron:MPEG10.1590/1981.81222019000100008info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessStorto,Lucianaeng2019-04-30T00:00:00Zoai:scielo:S1981-81222019000100121Revistahttps://www.scielo.br/j/bgoeldi/https://old.scielo.br/oai/scielo-oai.phpboletim.humanas@museu-goeldi.br||boletim.humanas@museu-goeldi.br1981-81222178-2547opendoar:2019-04-30T00:00Boletim do Museu Paraense Emílio Goeldi. Ciências Humanas - Museu Paraense Emílio Goeldi (MPEG)false |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
Kin terms in Karitiana and how they may contribute to the reconstruction of Proto-Tupian kin terminology |
title |
Kin terms in Karitiana and how they may contribute to the reconstruction of Proto-Tupian kin terminology |
spellingShingle |
Kin terms in Karitiana and how they may contribute to the reconstruction of Proto-Tupian kin terminology Storto,Luciana Karitiana Arikém Juruna Tupi Kinship Reconstruction |
title_short |
Kin terms in Karitiana and how they may contribute to the reconstruction of Proto-Tupian kin terminology |
title_full |
Kin terms in Karitiana and how they may contribute to the reconstruction of Proto-Tupian kin terminology |
title_fullStr |
Kin terms in Karitiana and how they may contribute to the reconstruction of Proto-Tupian kin terminology |
title_full_unstemmed |
Kin terms in Karitiana and how they may contribute to the reconstruction of Proto-Tupian kin terminology |
title_sort |
Kin terms in Karitiana and how they may contribute to the reconstruction of Proto-Tupian kin terminology |
author |
Storto,Luciana |
author_facet |
Storto,Luciana |
author_role |
author |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Storto,Luciana |
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv |
Karitiana Arikém Juruna Tupi Kinship Reconstruction |
topic |
Karitiana Arikém Juruna Tupi Kinship Reconstruction |
description |
Abstract This paper reports a case study that discusses issues related to the reconstruction of kinship terminology in Proto-Tupi, based on previous work by Araújo and Storto (2002) on the Arikém and Juruna subfamilies. It also presents the remaining kin terminology of the Karitiana language (Arikém branch or subfamily) which was not discussed in the case study. Comparing Karitiana (Landin, 1989) and Juruna (Lima, 1995) kin terminology, Araújo and Storto (2002) have shown that some cognates can be found in the two languages and proposed that they reconstruct in Proto-Tupi. These authors claim that these reconstructed items indicate the following hypotheses: (1) the speakers of Proto-Tupi (4500 BP) had a Dravidian kinship system; (2) the speakers of Proto-Tupi had a kinship and naming system in which ego was equated with the paternal grandparent of the same sex as ego. Besides the 11 cognates discussed by Araújo and Storto (2002), we discuss the remaining 19 kin terms that form the Karitiana kinship system according to Landin (1989). |
publishDate |
2019 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2019-04-01 |
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article |
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion |
format |
article |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1981-81222019000100121 |
url |
http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1981-81222019000100121 |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
eng |
language |
eng |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
10.1590/1981.81222019000100008 |
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
text/html |
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
MCTI/Museu Paraense Emílio Goeldi |
publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
MCTI/Museu Paraense Emílio Goeldi |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
Boletim do Museu Paraense Emílio Goeldi. Ciências Humanas v.14 n.1 2019 reponame:Boletim do Museu Paraense Emílio Goeldi. Ciências Humanas instname:Museu Paraense Emílio Goeldi (MPEG) instacron:MPEG |
instname_str |
Museu Paraense Emílio Goeldi (MPEG) |
instacron_str |
MPEG |
institution |
MPEG |
reponame_str |
Boletim do Museu Paraense Emílio Goeldi. Ciências Humanas |
collection |
Boletim do Museu Paraense Emílio Goeldi. Ciências Humanas |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
Boletim do Museu Paraense Emílio Goeldi. Ciências Humanas - Museu Paraense Emílio Goeldi (MPEG) |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
boletim.humanas@museu-goeldi.br||boletim.humanas@museu-goeldi.br |
_version_ |
1752128743448510464 |