Hubbry Logo
Songhay languagesSonghay languagesMain
Open search
Songhay languages
Community hub
Songhay languages
logo
8 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Songhay languages
Songhay languages
Songhay languages
View on Wikipedia
from Wikipedia
Songhay
Songhai, Ayneha
Geographic
distribution		Niger River valley
(Mali, Niger, Algeria, Benin, Burkina Faso, Nigeria); scattered oases (Niger, Mali, Algeria)
EthnicitySonghai
Linguistic classificationNilo-Saharan?
  • Songhay
Proto-languageProto-Songhay
Subdivisions
Language codes
ISO 639-2 / 5son
Glottologsong1307
Location of Songhay languages[1]

Northwest Songhay:

  Korandje
  Koyra Chiini
  Tadaksahak
  Tasawaq
  Tagdal

Eastern Songhay:

  Tondi Songway Kiini
  Humburi Senni
  Koyraboro Senni
  Zarma
  Songhoyboro Ciine
  Dendi

The Songhay, Songhai or Ayneha[2][3] languages ([sõʁaj], [soŋaj] or [soŋoj]) are a group of closely related languages/dialects centred on the middle stretches of the Niger River in the West African countries of Mali, Niger, Benin, Burkina Faso and Nigeria. In particular, they are spoken in the cities of Timbuktu, Djenné, Niamey, Gao, Tillaberi, Dosso, Parakou, Kandi, Natitingou, Djougou, Malanville, Gorom-Gorom, In-Gall and Tabelbala. They have been widely used as a lingua franca in that region ever since the era of the Songhai Empire. In Mali, the government has officially adopted the dialect of Gao (east of Timbuktu) as the dialect to be used as a medium of primary education.[4]

Some Songhay languages have little to no mutual intelligibility between each other. For example, Koyraboro Senni, spoken in Gao, is unintelligible to speakers of Zarma in Niger, according to Ethnologue. However, Songhoyboro Ciine,[5] Zarma, and Dendi have high mutual intelligibility within Niger.[6]

For linguists, a major point of interest in the Songhay languages has been the difficulty of determining their genetic affiliation; they are commonly taken to be Nilo-Saharan, as defined by Joseph Greenberg in 1963, but this classification remains controversial. Linguist Gerrit Dimmendaal (2008) believes that for now it is best considered an independent language family.[7] Roger Blench argues that the Songhay and Saharan languages form a Songhay-Saharan branch with each other within the wider Nilo-Saharan linguistic phylum.[8]

Historically, the name Songhay was neither an ethnic nor a linguistic designation for all, but a name for the ruling caste of the Songhai Empire which are the Songhai proper. The term used by the natives to address the languages and people collectively is Ayneha. Aside from the Songhai proper, some speakers in Mali have also adopted the name Songhay as an ethnic designation,[9] while other Songhay-speaking groups identify themselves with other ethnic terms, such as Zarma (Djerma) or Isawaghen (Sawaq).

A few precolonial poems and letters composed in Songhay and written in the Arabic script exist in Timbuktu.[10] However, Songhay is currently written in the Latin script.

Varieties

[edit]
Percentage of Songhay speakers by population
  1. Zarma (58.4%)
  2. Songhoyboro Ciine (18.9%)
  3. Koyraboro Senni (9.30%)
  4. Dendi (5.50%)
  5. Koyra Chiini (4.30%)
  6. Tadaksahak (2.20%)
  7. Others (1.40%)

Researchers classify the Songhay languages into two main branches; Southern and Northern.[11] Southern Songhay is centered on the Niger River. Zarma (Djerma), the most widely spoken Songhay language with two or three million speakers, is a major language of southwestern Niger (downriver from and south of Mali) including in the capital city, Niamey. Koyraboro Senni, with 400,000 speakers, is the language of the town of Gao, the seat of the old Songhai Empire. Koyra Chiini is spoken to its west. The much smaller Northern Songhay is a group of heavily Berber-influenced dialects spoken in the Sahara. Since the Berber influence extends beyond the lexicon into the inflectional morphology, the Northern Songhay languages are sometimes viewed as mixed languages.[12]

Genetic affiliation

[edit]

Diedrich Hermann Westermann, a missionary and linguist, hesitated between assigning it to Gur or considering it an isolate, and Maurice Delafosse grouped it with Mande. At present, Songhay is normally considered to be Nilo-Saharan, following Joseph Greenberg's 1963 reclassification of African languages; Greenberg's argument is based on about 70 claimed cognates, including pronouns.[citation needed] This proposal has been developed further by, in particular, Lionel Bender, who saw it as an independent subfamily of Nilo-Saharan. Roger Blench notes that Songhay shares the defining singulative–plurative morphology typical of Nilo-Saharan languages. As of 2011, he believes that Songhay is closest to the neighboring Saharan languages and is not divergent.

However, a Nilo-Saharan classification is controversial. Greenberg's argument was subjected to serious criticism by Lacroix, who deemed only about 30 of Greenberg's claimed cognates acceptable, and moreover argued that these held mainly between Zarma and the Saharan languages,[What about Tagdal, which neighbors Saharan?] thus leading one to suspect them of being loanwords.[13] Certain Songhay–Mande similarities have long been observed (at least since Westermann), and Mukarovsky (1966), Denis Creissels (1981) and Nicolaï (1977, 1984) investigated the possibility of a Mande relationship; Creissels made some 50 comparisons, including many body parts and morphological suffixes (such as the causative in -endi), while Nicolaï claimed some 450 similar words as well as some conspicuous typological traits.[citation needed] However, Nicolaï eventually concluded that this approach was not adequate, and in 1990 proposed a distinctly novel hypothesis: that Songhay is a Berber-based creole language, restructured under Mande influence. In support of this he proposed 412 similarities, ranging all the way from basic vocabulary (tasa "liver") to obvious borrowings (anzad "violin", alkaadi "qadi".) Others, such as Gerrit Dimmendaal, were not convinced, and Nicolaï (2003) appears to consider the question of Songhay's origins still open, while arguing against Bender's proposed etymologies.[citation needed]

Greenberg's morphological similarities with Nilo-Saharan include the personal pronouns ai (cf. Zaghawa ai), 'I', ni (cf. Kanuri nyi), 'you (sg.)', yer (e.g. Kanuri -ye), 'we', wor (cf. Kanuri -wi), 'you (pl.)'; relative and adjective formants -ma (e.g. Kanuri -ma) and -ko (cf. Maba -ko), a plural suffix -an (?), a hypothetical plural suffix -r (cf. Teso -r) which he takes to appear in the pronouns yer and wor, intransitive/passive -a (cf. Teso -o).[citation needed]

The most striking of the Mande similarities listed by Creissels are the third person pronouns a sg. (pan-Mande a), i pl. (pan-Mande i or e), the demonstratives wo "this" (cf. Manding o, wo) and no "there" (cf. Soninke no, other Mande na), the negative na (found in a couple of Manding dialects) and negative perfect mana (cf. Manding má, máŋ), the subjunctive ma (cf. Manding máa), the copula ti (cf. Bisa ti, Manding de/le), the verbal connective ka (cf. Manding kà), the suffixes -ri (resultative – cf. Mandinka -ri, Bambara -li process nouns), -ncè (ethnonymic, cf. Soninke -nke, Mandinka -nka), -anta (ordinal, cf. Soninke -ndi, Mandinka -njaŋ...), -anta (resultative participle, cf. Soninke -nte), -endi (causative, cf. Soninke, Mandinka -ndi), and the postposition ra "in" (cf. Manding lá, Soso ra...)[citation needed]

The Songhay languages are considered to be an independent family by Dimmendaal (2011), although he classifies Saharan as part of Nilo-Saharan.[14]

Grammar

[edit]

Songhay is mostly a tonal, subject–object–verb (SOV) group of languages, an exception being the divergent Koyra Chiini of Timbuktu, which is non-tonal and uses subject-verb-object word order.

Songhay has a morpheme -ndi which marks either the causative or the agentless passive. Verbs can even take two instances of the morpheme, one for each meaning. Thus ŋa-ndi-ndi figuratively translates to "[the rice] was made to be eaten [by someone: causee] [by someone: causer]".[15]

Reconstruction of Proto-Songhay

[edit]
Proto-Songhay
Reconstruction ofSonghay languages

Below are some Proto-Songhay reconstructions:[8]

Gloss Proto-Songhay
person *bòro
bird *kídòw
scorpion, mosquito *(n)děŋ
ashes *bó:sú
stone, mountain *tóndì
year *gí:rí; *mán(n)à
yesterday *bǐ:
ask *há˜
bring *kàte
thorn *kárgí
skin *kú:rú
blood *kúdí
year *gí:rí

Some Proto-Eastern Songhay reconstructions are:[8]

Gloss Proto-Eastern Songhay
thatch hut *bùgù
armpit, wing *fátá
thirst *gèw
flank *kéráw
mason wasp *bímbín(í)
sweat *súŋgáy

Numerals

[edit]

Comparison of numerals in individual languages:[16]

Language 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Korandje affu* jnka jnzˁa rˁəbʕa < Arabic χəmsa < Arabic sətta < Arabic səbʕa < Arabic tmənja < Arabic təsʕa < Arabic ʕəʃrˁa < Arabic
Tadaksahak a-ˈfːo / a-ˈfːoo-da hiŋˈka kaːˈrˤad < Tamasheq aˈkːoːz < Tamasheq ʃaˈmːuʃ < Tamasheq ʃaːˈdˤiʃ < Tamasheq iˈʃːa < Tamasheq iˈtˤːam < Tamasheq tˤaːˈsˤa < Tamasheq maːˈrˤa < Tamasheq
Tasawaq fó / a-fːó hínká / à-hínká hínzà / à-hínzà táásì / à-tːáásì xámsà < Arabic sítːà < Arabic sábàɣà < Arabic tàmáníyà < Arabic tísàɣà < Arabic ɣàsárà < Arabic
Dendi afɔ hayinka / ahinka ahinza ataki aɡu ayidu ayiye / ahiye ayiyaku ayiɡa aweyi
Koyraboro Senni affoo ihinka ihinza itaatʃi iɡɡuu idduu iyye iyaaha iyaɡɡa iwoy
Koyra Chiini foo / a-foo hiŋka hindʒa taatʃi ɡuu iddu iiye yaaha yaɡɡa woy / wey
Zarma, Songhoyboro Ciine àˈfó ìˈhíŋká ìˈhínzà ìˈtaːcí ìˈɡú ˈíddù ˈijjè àˈhákˌkù ˈjǽɡɡà ìˈwéɪ

Bibliography

[edit]

References

[edit]

Further reading

[edit]
[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia

Songhay languages

View on Grokipedia
from Grokipedia
The Songhay languages constitute a small family of closely related tongues spoken primarily along the in , encompassing approximately 3 to 4 million native speakers (as of the 2020s) across , , and adjacent regions in , , , and beyond. These languages are characterized by their tonal systems and significant lexical influences from neighboring language families such as Mande, Berber, and , reflecting centuries of historical contact in the zone. Their genetic classification remains a subject of scholarly debate, with most linguists tentatively placing Songhay within the Nilo-Saharan phylum as a primary branch, potentially forming a subgroup with Saharan languages, though alternative affiliations to Mande or even isolates have been proposed based on phonological and morphological evidence. The family is typically subdivided into Northern Songhay (including Tadaksahak, Tasawaq, Tagdal, and Tabarog, with approximately 140,000 speakers collectively as of the 2020s, mainly in northern Mali and Niger) and Southern Songhay (encompassing Zarma, Dendi, Koyraboro Senni, and others, accounting for the majority of speakers at over 2 million in Niger alone based on late 1990s data; current estimates higher). Zarma, the most widely spoken variety with around 2–3 million users, serves as a lingua franca in southwestern Niger and is known for its role in regional trade and administration. Songhay languages exhibit notable internal diversity, with Northern varieties showing stronger Berber substrate influences due to nomadic Tuareg interactions, while Southern forms display more Mande borrowings from historical interactions with the Mali Empire. Despite their relative vitality in urban centers like Niamey and Gao, many dialects face pressures from dominant languages such as French, Hausa, and Fulfulde, prompting ongoing sociolinguistic documentation efforts. The family's historical significance is tied to the medieval Songhai Empire, where languages like Koyraboro Senni facilitated administration and scholarship in Timbuktu.

Introduction

Definition and scope

The Songhay languages constitute a small family comprising approximately 10 to 12 closely related languages and dialects, primarily spoken along the valley in , extending from northeastern through western into parts of , , and southern . This geographic core reflects the historical expansion of Songhay-speaking communities tied to the medieval Songhay Empire, though the languages predate this political entity. The nomenclature "Songhay" (or alternatively "Songhai") derives from the name of the influential Songhay Empire (15th–16th centuries), but historically, "Songhai" denoted the empire's ruling caste rather than a unified ethnic or linguistic identity. Linguistic recognition of Songhay as a distinct family emerged in the mid-19th century amid broader efforts to classify African languages, with scholars noting their unique profile separate from neighboring Niger-Congo and Afroasiatic groups. This status was formalized in H. Greenberg's influential 1963 classification, which positioned Songhay as the primary branch of the Nilo-Saharan phylum based on shared vocabulary and structural features, though subsequent debates have questioned this genetic affiliation in favor of isolate status or substratum influences from Mande or . A hallmark of the Songhay family is its typological profile, characterized by isolating morphology—in which words generally consist of a single morpheme with minimal inflectional affixes—and a canonical subject-verb-object (SVO) word order, often modified by an auxiliary verb as S-AUX-O-V. These traits distinguish Songhay from more agglutinative or fusional families in the region, emphasizing analytic structures for grammatical relations via particles and position. Marginal varieties like Zarma and Dendi are unambiguously included within the family, particularly in the Southern subgroup, due to high lexical similarity (85–95%) and shared innovations such as tonal systems and noun incorporation patterns.

Geographic distribution

The Songhay languages are primarily distributed across the basin in , with core areas spanning , , , and , as well as extensions into southern . These languages thrive in riverine and Sahelian zones, particularly along the middle from and in central eastward through and into the of western , where floodplains and support sedentary agricultural communities. Isolated pockets, such as Korandje in the Tabelbala oasis of southern , reflect ancient connections rather than continuous riverine settlement. Urban centers like in serve as longstanding linguistic hubs for Eastern Songhay varieties, rooted in the city's role as a medieval trading nexus, while in functions as a modern center for Zarma (Southern Songhay), drawing speakers from surrounding rural areas due to its status as the national capital. The historical spread of Songhay languages was profoundly shaped by migrations associated with the during the 15th and 16th centuries, when expansions from along the disseminated Eastern Songhay varieties, likely displacing or influencing pre-existing Northwestern forms in northern . Today, the geographic continuity of Songhay speech communities has been fragmented by colonial-era borders imposed by and Britain, which divided riverine populations across modern nation-states and disrupted traditional dialect continua. Modern urbanization exacerbates this fragmentation, as rural-to-urban migration concentrates speakers in cities like and , fostering dialect leveling while marginalizing peripheral varieties in remote Sahelian zones.

Speaker demographics

The Songhay languages collectively have an estimated 3–4 million first-language speakers as of the early 2020s, distributed primarily across , , , , and smaller pockets in and . Zarma (also known as Djerma) is the largest variety, with approximately 2–3 million speakers (as of 2020) concentrated in southwestern and adjacent areas. Other major varieties include Koyraboro Senni with approximately 400,000 speakers (as of 2007) in eastern and Koyra Chiini with about 480,000 speakers (as of 2010) around . Smaller varieties, such as those in the Northern Songhay subgroup (e.g., Tasawaq, Tagdal, and Tabarog), account for roughly 25,000–35,000 speakers in total, mainly in northern and . Vitality varies significantly across varieties. Major ones like Zarma are stable, serving as national languages in and used in education, media, and government alongside French. In contrast, isolated varieties such as Korandje in southern are severely endangered per assessments, with fluency largely confined to speakers over 35 and limited transmission to younger generations. Northern Songhay languages, often referred to as Humboldt's Songhay, are classified as vulnerable due to their small populations and intergenerational use primarily within ethnic communities, though they remain vital in daily rural life. Songhay speakers form predominantly rural Muslim communities engaged in , , and along the basin, with shaping cultural and linguistic practices through loanwords and religious education. Urban migration to centers like , , and has increased in recent decades, leading to growing urban populations and exposure to national languages. Bilingualism is widespread, with most speakers proficient in French as the colonial legacy and official language in and , for religious contexts, and Hausa as a regional in border areas. Among younger speakers, particularly in urban settings and smaller ethnic groups, there is evidence of language shift toward French and Hausa, driven by schooling, media, and economic opportunities, which accelerates in minor varieties while major ones like Zarma maintain intergenerational transmission. Age distributions show higher fluency among adults over 30 in rural areas, with children in endangered subgroups often acquiring the passively alongside dominant ones.

Classification

Genetic affiliation

The Songhay languages are most commonly classified as part of the Nilo-Saharan phylum, a large proposed language family spanning much of inland northern and eastern . This affiliation was initially established by in his seminal 1963 classification of African languages, where he incorporated Songhay into Nilo-Saharan based on observed lexical and typological resemblances to other groups within the phylum, such as Saharan and Eastern Sudanic. Supporting evidence includes shared phonological and morphological traits, such as the presence of tonal systems in certain Songhay varieties like Dendi, which align with the tonal nature prevalent across much of Nilo-Saharan, and verbal extensions including valency-changing suffixes (e.g., causative -ndi and centripetal -kate in Koyra Chiini). Grammatical parallels encompass the possessor-possessed ordering in genitive constructions, mirroring patterns in related Nilo-Saharan branches. Lexicostatistical studies further bolster this, revealing cognacy rates exceeding 30% between Songhay and for basic vocabulary items like pronouns, body parts, and numerals. Christopher Ehret advanced this classification in the 2000s through historical-comparative reconstructions, positioning Songhay within a West Sahelian subgroup of Nilo-Saharan alongside Maban and other families, drawing on refined cognate sets and reconstructed verbal morphology. Nevertheless, the affiliation remains debated, with some linguists proposing Songhay as an independent isolate due to insufficient robust shared innovations or alternatively attributing its features to substrate influences from amid historical Saharan interactions. For example, Robert Nicolaï has suggested a process involving Berber elements, while Gerrit Dimmendaal highlights the possibility of areal borrowing from neighboring Mande and rather than deep genetic ties.

Internal subgrouping

The Songhay language family is typically divided into two primary branches: Northwest Songhay and Eastern Songhay, based on shared phonological, morphological, and lexical innovations that distinguish them from Proto-Songhay. Northwest Songhay further splits into Northern and Western subgroups, reflecting innovations such as the development of velar fricatives (g > γ) and specific semantic shifts in core vocabulary like kani '' and kaŋkam ''. Eastern Songhay, by contrast, shows fewer unified innovations, such as vowel lengthening (-awa > -a:), and may represent a more recent rather than a tight genetic . Subgrouping criteria emphasize cladistic methods, relying on arbitrary shared innovations rather than areal features from contact. Key isoglosses include pronominal systems, where Northern Songhay languages exhibit subject prefixes (e.g., in Tagdal and Tadaksahak), influenced by Berber syntax, while Western and Eastern varieties use suffixes or independent pronouns for subjects. Phonological evidence, such as nasal simplification (V:n > Vn) in Northwest Songhay and the shift k > q before back vowels in Northern varieties under Tamasheq influence, further supports these divisions. Lexical isoglosses, including innovations in terms for 'see' (from 'look') and 'stomach', reinforce the Northwest unity. The hierarchical structure can be represented textually as follows:
  • Proto-Songhay
    • Northwest Songhay
      • Northern Songhay: Kwarandzyey, Tadaksahak, Tagdal (with dialects like Tabarog), Tasawaq, †Emghedesie
      • Western Songhay: Koyra Chiini,
    • Eastern Songhay: Humburi Senni, Koyraboro Senni, Tondi Songway Kiini, Kaado, Zarma, Dendi
This includes 10 core languages, with dialects such as those of Tagdal varying by nomadic group (e.g., Abargan, Tarbun). Recent proposals affirm Tagdal's inclusion in Northern Songhay, despite heavy Berber loans (comprising 25–75% of its lexicon, including affixes like causative s-), due to shared Songhay innovations in genitive markers (n) and centrifugal directionals, positioning it as a convergence zone rather than a separate branch.

Classification controversies

The classification of the Songhay languages within the Nilo-Saharan phylum has long been a subject of debate among linguists, with the overall validity of Nilo-Saharan itself frequently questioned due to the paucity of robust shared innovations and the prevalence of weak lexical resemblances that may stem from borrowing rather than genetic descent. Roger Blench, in his analysis, critiques the reliance on such tenuous cognates—for instance, the proposed shared term for "hand" (Saharan *kòbè vs. Songhay *kòpši), where semantic shifts and potential Hausa-mediated loans undermine claims of common ancestry—arguing that these resemblances often fail to meet rigorous comparative standards. This skepticism echoes broader methodological concerns, including Joseph Greenberg's mass comparison approach, which prioritizes broad lexical matches over systematic sound correspondences, contrasting with calls for reconstructions that remain hampered by the oral nature of Songhay traditions and limited historical documentation. A key point of contention is Songhay's apparent role as a "link ," exhibiting significant admixture from non-Nilo-Saharan families, particularly Mande and Berber (Tuareg), which complicates ascribing a pure genetic affiliation. Northern Songhay varieties, such as those spoken in the , show heavy substrate influence from Tuareg, including borrowed morphology and that obscure underlying Nilo-Saharan features and challenge notions of unadulterated descent from a proto-Nilo-Saharan source. Jeffrey Heath's detailed grammars highlight these contact effects, noting bidirectional borrowing patterns that position Songhay at a linguistic crossroads rather than a straightforward branch. Earlier proposals, like Robert Nicolai's () hypothesis of Songhay as a Berber creole, have been largely rejected, yet they underscore how areal via routes (e.g., trans-Saharan networks) could mimic genetic ties. In the 2020s, the consensus remains provisional, with Songhay tentatively retained within Nilo-Saharan—often as a sister to Saharan—but scholars like Gerrit J. Dimmendaal advocate treating it as an isolate pending stronger evidence from integrated linguistic and genetic studies. Methodological advancements, such as cladistic subgrouping based on shared innovations, have clarified internal Songhay structure but reinforce the need for interdisciplinary approaches, including genomic correlations to trace movements and disentangle contact from inheritance. This ongoing debate highlights the challenges of classifying languages in contact-heavy regions like the Bend, where historical migrations and substrate effects demand cautious interpretation.

Varieties

Major languages and dialects

The major Songhay languages are Zarma, Koyraboro Senni, and Koyra Chiini, which together account for the majority of speakers across . Zarma (ISO 639-3: dje) is primarily spoken in southwestern and northern , with additional communities in , , and ; it has approximately 5 million speakers (as of 2023) and serves as a of wider communication and instruction in . Koyraboro Senni (ISO 639-3: ses), centered in the of eastern along the , has around 1.3 million speakers and is recognized as a stable with growing literary resources. Koyra Chiini (ISO 639-3: khq), spoken in the region of northern , counts about 480,000 speakers and functions as the primary in its ethnic communities. Key dialects within these languages exhibit regional variations, particularly in lexicon and usage. For instance, the dialect of Koyraboro Senni, which forms the basis of the language's standardization in , differs lexically from the variant of Koyra Chiini, with the latter retaining more vocabulary shared with northern Songhay forms while shows stronger influences from eastern riverine trade terms. These differences highlight the along the , though they do not impede basic communication in shared contexts. Marginal varieties include Dendi (ISO 639-3: ddn), spoken by about 440,000 people mainly in northern , , and , which serves as a transitional form linking Zarma and Koyraboro Senni through shared phonological and lexical features. Humburi Senni (ISO 639-3: hmb), with approximately 50,000 speakers in the Hombori region straddling and , acts as another transitional variety in central Songhay, bridging southern and northern subgroups via mixed morphological traits. Standardization efforts in Songhay languages have evolved from historical use of the Arabic-based , employed since the medieval period for religious texts and trade records in varieties like Zarma and Koyraboro Senni, to contemporary adaptations of the promoted in educational programs. In , the Gao dialect of Koyraboro Senni has been prioritized for using , supporting development, while recognizes Zarma similarly for policies.

Mutual intelligibility and dialect continuum

The Songhay languages exhibit characteristics of a , particularly along the , where varieties form a chain extending from and in through to and , with gradual lexical and grammatical shifts between neighboring dialects. This riverine model reflects historical patterns of trade and migration, allowing adjacent varieties to maintain high while distant ones diverge more sharply. Eastern Songhay varieties, centered around , come closest to a true continuum, though extra-riverine forms in areas like Hombori and Kikara in show greater isolation. Sociolinguistic studies using recorded text tests demonstrate varying degrees of inherent intelligibility across Songhay varieties. In , Southern Songhay dialects—including Zarma (also known as Dyarma), Songhoyboro Ciine, Kurtey, Wogo, and Dendi—exhibit high mutual comprehension, with mean scores exceeding 90% and lexical similarities ranging from 85% to 96%, indicating minimal barriers to communication within this cluster. However, intelligibility drops significantly with Eastern varieties from , such as the dialect, where comprehension scores range from 28% to 64% among Niger speakers, as low as 32% to 46% in some locations due to phonological and lexical differences. Northern Songhay isolates, like Tagdal and Tabarog, show internal mutual intelligibility around 88% to 89%, but only about 50% comprehension with other Northern varieties such as Tadaksahak and Tasawaq, and even lower with Southern mainstream forms along the river. Several factors influence these intelligibility patterns, including extensive that creates hybrid zones. Northern varieties have incorporated Berber substrates from , while Southern and Eastern forms show Mande and Hausa loans from riverine commerce and Fulani interactions, sometimes leading to trade pidgins that bridge comprehension gaps. These contact effects exacerbate divergence in peripheral areas, reducing intelligibility beyond immediate neighbors. The continuum nature of Songhay poses challenges for and in census data, as the boundary between "languages" and "dialects" often depends on sociopolitical rather than purely linguistic criteria. High intelligibility within Southern clusters supports unified literary standards, such as based on Dosso Zarma, but low comprehension with Northern isolates and Malian Eastern varieties complicates broader efforts, leading to fragmented reporting of speaker numbers and identities.

Phonology

Consonant inventory

The consonant inventories of Songhay languages typically range from 20 to 25 phonemes in southern varieties to over 30 in northern ones, reflecting both shared proto-forms and contact-induced innovations from neighboring language families such as Mande and Berber. Common across branches are voiceless and voiced stops at bilabial, alveolar, and velar places of articulation (/p, b, t, d, k, g/), fricatives (/f, s, h/), nasals (/m, n, ŋ/), a lateral (/l/), a rhotic (/r/), and glides (/w, j/), with a (/ʔ/) often marginal or allophonic. Palatal affricates (/t͡ʃ, d͡ʒ/, transcribed as /c, j/) and a palatal nasal (/ɲ/) are also widespread in southern and central varieties. In southern Songhay languages such as Koyra Chiini, the inventory is relatively simple, with 21 core consonants excluding marginal loan-derived sounds like /χ/ and /z/. Stops and affricates may be aspirated in initial position (e.g., [pʰ, tʰ]), but this is non-contrastive. The table below illustrates the inventory organized by place and :
BilabialAlveolarPalatalVelarGlottal
Stopsp bt dk gʔ
Affricatesc j
Fricativesfsh
Nasalsmŋ
Liquids/Glidesl [rj](/page/R_and_J)
This system supports contrasts like /b/ vs. /m/ (e.g., bay 'know' vs. may 'have'). ŋ arises from assimilation (e.g., /n/ + velar). Northern Songhay varieties, heavily influenced by Berber languages, feature expanded inventories with pharyngealized (emphatic) consonants at alveolar and velar places (/ṭ, ḍ, ṣ, ẓ/, often realized as glottalized or pharyngealized stops like [tˤ, dˤ, kʼ]), uvular stops (/q/), and pharyngeal fricatives (/ħ, ʕ/). For example, in Tagdal, the inventory includes 28+ consonants, adding to the core set: emphatic series (/ṭ ḍ ṣ ẓ ṇ ḷ ṛ/), palatal affricates and fricatives (/t͡ʃ d͡ʒ ʃ ʒ/), velar fricatives (/x ɣ/), and pharyngeals. Tadaksahak similarly incorporates these, with /q ħ ʕ/ and emphatic alveolars, yielding over 30 phonemes. Glottalization is prominent in stops like /kʼ/, distinguishing northern forms from southern ones. Phonotactics in Songhay languages favor open syllables of the form CV or CVV, with closed CVC permitted medially and word-finally under restrictions (e.g., no codas except rare /b/ in southern varieties; geminates like /tt/ or nasal-stop clusters /mb nd ŋg/ common intervocalically). Word-initial clusters are rare, limited to glide + in some northern dialects (e.g., /jw/ in Tagdal). No complex onsets occur, and + sequences are avoided initially. These patterns hold across branches, though northern languages allow more coda variety due to emphatic series. Orthographic representations employ Latin-based systems adapted locally: in , French-influenced conventions use <p b t d k g f s h m n ŋ l r w y> for core sounds, with for palatals and digraphs like for /ʃ/ in northern varieties; emphatics may be marked with dots ( ) or apostrophes for (k'). Niger's systems for Zarma and related southern dialects similarly prioritize practical Latin scripts, often omitting ŋ (as ) and using for the flap. These vary by national standardization efforts, with no unified pan-Songhay .

Vowel system and harmony

The Songhay languages typically feature a symmetrical five-vowel oral system consisting of /i, e, a, o, u/, with phonemic length distinctions that contrast short and long realizations in most varieties. This proto-Songhay inventory, reconstructed across dialects, maintains height and rounding contrasts without advanced tongue root (ATR) distinctions as a defining feature, though some morphological processes show limited . Nasal vowels appear as counterparts in several southern and central varieties, such as Zarma and Koyra Chiini, yielding /ĩ, ẽ, ã, õ, ũ/ alongside orals, often triggered by adjacent nasals or lexical specification; these are phonemically distinct and marked orthographically with tildes or following nasals. Vowel harmony in Songhay primarily manifests in suffix allomorphy rather than root-to-root spreading, where affixes adjust their quality to match the height or backness of the stem's final , as seen in verbal derivations across eastern and southern subgroups. For instance, in Koyra Chiini, certain es alternate between /e/ and /o/ forms based on the preceding , reflecting a historical height-based assimilation that is not fully predictable and suggests deeper retention from proto-forms. This process affects functional morphemes like aspect markers but does not extend to full ATR harmony, distinguishing Songhay from neighboring Nilo-Saharan branches. Diphthongs such as /ai/ and /au/ occur frequently in Zarma and related southern dialects, often arising from vowel-consonant sequences or lexical items, and are treated as unitary phonemes in rapid speech; for example, /bai/ 'they buy' combines a glide-like transition. Vowel reductions, including and syncope, are common in across varieties, particularly in non-initial syllables, where short vowels may delete before suffixes, as in Humburi Senni forms like prevocalic /ey/ or /ow/ simplification. Dialectal variation in the vowel system is pronounced in contact-influenced varieties; northern mixed languages like Tasawaq exhibit a reduced inventory with only three heights and innovative contrasts, such as /a/ versus /æ/, correlated with loss or retention from Berber substrate. Urban Zarma, shaped by Hausa and French bilingualism, shows fewer length distinctions and nasal mergers in informal registers, simplifying the full seven-vowel potential (five oral plus two nasal) found in rural baselines.

Suprasegmental features

The suprasegmental of Songhay languages varies significantly across varieties, reflecting historical shifts from a proto-tonal to stress-based prosody in many mainstream dialects. Proto-Songhay is reconstructed with a binary high (H) and low () register tone , which served both lexical and grammatical functions, but tone has been lost or reduced in most Southern and some Northern varieties, often replaced by lexical stress that echoes earlier tone patterns. In tonal varieties, such as Tondi Songway Kiini (TSK) and Tasawaq, the retains H and level tones on tone-bearing units (typically vowels or syllables), with TSK preserving archaic lexical tones on nouns and verbs as well as grammatical overlays for categories like possession and tense. The functional load of tone is substantial in retaining varieties, where it distinguishes lexical items and grammatical categories. For instance, in Tasawaq, tone contrasts lexical classes of verbs, such as stative versus active forms (e.g., underlying tone patterns differentiate inherent aspectual meanings in verb roots). Similarly, in Humburi Senni, tone marks verb stem meanings and derivations; for example, L-toned stems like dìrà "walk" become dìrà-dírà with H-raising on iteration to convey , while floating H-tones from morphemes overwrite underlying patterns in compounds. Contour tones appear in Northern varieties like Tasawaq, limited to falling (HL) realizations, often on long vowels, with no phonemic rising tones; these contours arise from tone sequences rather than independent units. In non-tonal varieties, such as Tadaksahak and Koyra Chiini, prosody relies on stress rather than tone, with lexical stress assigned unpredictably to any and marked by increased pitch and intensity. Stress patterns in polysyllabic words favor medial positions (e.g., tugúdu "" with medial stress in Tadaksahak), though initial and final stresses occur, and secondary stresses may appear in longer forms; long vowels do not inherently attract stress but align closely with it. Intonation features weak overall stress, with phrase-final lengthening common across varieties to signal boundaries, and question patterns typically involve rising pitch on the final constituent in yes/no interrogatives, though details vary by . Allotonic variations include rules in tonal systems, where tones assimilate or spread across word boundaries. In Humburi Senni, rightward H-spreading applies in phrases (e.g., H from a possessor docks onto the following possessed form), and left-to-right L-spreading occurs in atonal suffixes; tonal enforces alternations like H-L-H in imperatives to avoid adjacent H tones. Downstep phenomena, where a following H is realized lower after an L, appear in some tonal contexts like TSK complexes, enhancing contrast without altering underlying representations. These processes operate on as primary tone bearers, interacting with the segmental vowel system.

Grammar

Nominal morphology

Songhay languages display minimal nominal inflection, with no noun classes or grammatical gender across the family. Natural gender distinctions, such as male and female kin terms, are conveyed lexically through distinct pairs or compounds rather than morphological marking. Number marking on nouns varies by subgroup. In central varieties like Koyra Chiini, nouns themselves lack dedicated plural suffixes; instead, number is primarily indicated by the definite article, which distinguishes singular (-ndə) from plural (-bə) forms, as in häysi-ndə "the dog" versus häysi-bə "the dogs." Northern Songhay languages, influenced by Berber substrates, often employ plural suffixes directly on the noun stem, such as -én in beerén "older siblings" (from ber "older sibling") or -an in karfán "ropes" (from karfí "rope"). Possession is typically expressed without dedicated case marking, relying on juxtaposition for inalienable relations (e.g., body parts, kin) and linkers or pronouns for alienable ones. In Koyra Chiini, inalienable possession juxtaposes the possessor directly to the possessed noun, yielding forms like ay naa "my mother" or i kamba "your hand." Alienable possession inserts the genitive linker wane between elements, as in ay baaba wane häysi "my father's dog." Northern varieties like Tagdal use cliticized possessive pronouns (e.g., ɣa= "my") or the genitive marker n, producing ɣa=n tabárar "my daughter" or ɣa=ŋ kámba "my hand," with juxtaposition also common for close relations like aaró nda way "husband and wife." Derivational morphology creates nouns from verbs and other bases, often forming action or abstract nouns. A common verbal nominalizer is -ndi, which derives relational or process nouns, as in Tagdal's hangándi "companion" from hanga "accompany" or zumbúndi "descent" from zumbú "descend." In Koyra Chiini, the suffix -ey functions as an abstractive nominalizer, yielding sendey "difficulty" from the verb sendu "be difficult." Compounds and prefixes of substrate origin (e.g., a- or t- in Northern Songhay) further expand the nominal inventory, though these are less systematic.

Verbal structure

Songhay languages exhibit a predominantly isolating verbal morphology, with finite verbs typically consisting of an invariant root optionally modified by derivational suffixes or preceded by particles and auxiliaries for tense-aspect-mood (TAM) and . This aligns with the family's Nilo-Saharan affiliation, emphasizing analytic strategies over fusional , though some varieties show limited suffixation for derivation. Serial verb constructions further extend expressive capacity by chaining roots to convey complex predications. Tense-aspect distinctions are primarily analytic, relying on preverbal particles or rather than suffixes, though the perfective often appears unmarked and defaults to past reference. In Humburi Senni, the perfective is zero-marked (e.g., ɲì zòŋó 'I ate the food'), while the imperfective uses the particle gù or ŋ̀ (e.g., gù ɲì zòŋó 'I eat/am eating the food'). Similarly, in Koyra Chiini, the perfective conveys (e.g., ay jí 'I came'), and the imperfective particle ga expresses ongoing or habitual actions, with imperfective forms adaptable for narrative past contexts. Future tense is periphrastic across varieties, often involving like the desiderative ka 'want' (e.g., ka zòŋó 'will eat') or prefixes such as tə- in northern forms like Tagdal (e.g., ɣa=tə-koy 'I will go'). , used for irrealis or hortatives, employs particles like m- (e.g., m- zòŋó 'let him eat'). Valency adjustments occur through suffixal derivation, increasing or decreasing argument roles. Causatives are widely marked by the suffix -ànd- or -ndi, derived from Proto-Songhay *-ndi, as in Zarma kà-ndì 'make go' from kà 'go' or Humburi Senni dín-èyndí 'light (fire)' from dín 'burn'. Passives are typically periphrastic, using auxiliaries or nominalizations, but some varieties employ suffixes like -à for resultative passives in Humburi Senni (e.g., tìy-à 'be done' from tìy 'do'). Northern varieties like Tagdal use prefixes such as təw- for passives (e.g., a=təwwənɣa 'was killed'). These mechanisms allow transitive verbs to become intransitive or introduce causers without altering core syntax. Negation is consistently preverbal, using particles or prefixes that interact with TAM markers to form fused negative forms. In Humburi Senni, imperfective negation employs sù (e.g., sù ɲì zòŋó 'I don't eat'), while perfective uses nàŋ (e.g., nàŋ ɲì zòŋó 'I didn't eat'). Tagdal similarly prefixes s- for imperfective (e.g., ɣa=sə-bwa 'I don't eat') and n- for perfective (e.g., ɣa=nə-daɣ 'I didn't forget'). Central varieties like Koyra Chiini feature ka- in certain negative contexts, often combining with auxiliaries for aspectual negation (e.g., ka wày 'not come'). This preverbal positioning underscores the analytic profile, with negation scoping over the entire verbal complex. Serial verb constructions (SVCs) are a core feature, enabling the of multiple verbs to express manner, direction, or result without overt linking. Verbs in an SVC share a single subject, TAM, and negation, as in Humburi Senni motion SVCs like kù kóy 'VP and go' (e.g., zòŋó kù kóy 'eat and go'). In Koyra Chiini, SVCs chain for complex actions, such as or purposive sequences (e.g., instrumental verb followed by main verb). These constructions, common in the family's isolating syntax, facilitate nuanced event descriptions akin to those in neighboring West African languages.

Syntax and word order

Songhay languages predominantly follow a subject-verb-object (SVO) in declarative clauses, where grammatical roles are primarily signaled by constituent order rather than case marking. This structure holds across mainstream varieties like Koyra Chiini and Eastern Songhay, as well as Northern varieties such as Tagdal and Tadaksahak. For instance, in Tagdal, a simple transitive sentence appears as a kóy yáabu ('she went to the market'), with the subject preceding the verb and object. In Humburi Senni, an example is ʔáy díy-à ('I see him'), illustrating the VO pattern within the verb complex. While SVO is , discourse-driven flexibility arises through topic-fronting, where elements like subjects or objects can be preposed for emphasis without altering core relations, as seen in focus constructions in Tagdal. Question formation relies on prosodic cues and particles rather than inversion. Yes/no questions typically feature a rising intonation contour, supplemented in some varieties by particles such as ǝ́nta in Tagdal or ak in Tadaksahak. Content questions place wh-words like may ('who') or mǝʃʃí ('what') in initial position, maintaining SVO for the remainder, as in Tagdal's məʃiggá anji b háʃi ʃaarayyen? ('Why are you looking at each other?'). This pattern aligns with broader Nilo-Saharan tendencies but shows variety-specific particles, such as nə́ in certain mainstream dialects for confirmation-seeking. Relative clauses are post-nominal and embedded directly after the head , often introduced by a relativizer like kaa in Zarma or gâ in Humburi Senni. In mainstream Songhay, subject relatives may use a prefix like ǝ- (as in Tagdal's ǝ- b- haw 'that had the tied on'), while object and oblique relatives frequently include resumptive s to resume the relativized gap, especially in Eastern varieties like Koyraboro Senni. For example, in Songhay, object relatives require a full resumptive pronoun in the original position, contrasting with zero traces in Western varieties like Koyra Chiini. Northern varieties like Tadaksahak may omit overt linkers, relying on or (ne or ho). Coordination of clauses or noun phrases employs for simple linkage or dedicated conjunctions, with nda ('and') being widespread, as in Tagdal's yu nda tawarat ('a and (her) baby'). Sequential coordination uses markers like tǝzzár ('then') in Tagdal or ńdù in Humburi Senni. Focus constructions, often overlapping with clefting, highlight elements through fronting or particles like da in Tagdal (ínga da, i m jéwab ínsa 'They’re the ones who should answer you'), enhancing pragmatic prominence without disrupting the underlying SVO frame. These features draw on verbal and nominal morphology for integration but emphasize clausal syntax.

Lexicon and reconstruction

Core vocabulary and numerals

The Songhay languages exhibit a vigesimal-decimal numeral system in some varieties, but predominantly employ a base-10 structure for cardinal numbers up to 10, with higher numerals formed through , , or . In Koyra Chiini, a Western Songhay language spoken along the in , the basic numerals are foo 'one', hiŋka 'two', hinja 'three', taatʃi 'four', ɡuu 'five', iddu 'six', iiye 'seven', yaaha 'eight', yaɡɡa 'nine', and woy 'ten'. Similarly, in Zarma (also known as Djerma), an Eastern Songhay language in , the system uses afo 'one', ihinka 'two', ihinza 'three', itaaci 'four', iggu 'five', iddu 'six', iyye 'seven', ahakku 'eight', iyegga 'nine', and iway 'ten', with compounds like iway cindi afo for 'eleven' (ten and one). Numbers beyond 10 often combine these bases additively, such as 'twenty' as 'two tens' in both languages, reflecting a consistent pattern across the family despite phonetic variations. Cognate sets among numerals highlight shared lexical roots across Songhay branches, aiding in dialect comparisons and subgrouping. For instance, the form for 'three' shows reflexes like hinja in Koyra Chiini and ihinza in Zarma, pointing to a Proto-Songhay etymon like *hinza, while 'five' appears as ɡuu and iggu, suggesting gu as an ancestral base. In Northern Songhay varieties like Tasawaq, numerals retain more conservative forms with potential Berber influences but maintain base-10 alignment, such as cognates for 'one' and 'two' shared with mainstream varieties. These shared roots underscore the family's internal coherence despite areal contacts. Basic lexicon in Songhay reveals patterns in body parts and kinship terms that retain possible Nilo-Saharan elements, providing diagnostics for genetic affiliations. Common body part terms include goo 'head' and cin 'eye' across Koyra Chiini and Zarma, with cin showing vowel harmony variations. Kinship vocabulary features mə or ma 'mother' in several varieties, as in Koyra Chiini má and Zarma mà, potentially linking to broader Nilo-Saharan mV roots for maternal terms, while 'father' appears as bà or aya. These terms exhibit minimal variation within the family, contrasting with more divergent semantic fields. Semantic fields tied to and riverine dominate the core , reflecting the Songhay peoples' historical to the basin. Terms for agriculture include zey 'millet' (a staple crop) and kà 'to cultivate' in Zarma, paralleled by séy and kà in Koyra Chiini, emphasizing flood-recession farming practices. Riverine vocabulary features isa ber ' (lit. 'big river')' and bàrɗu '', shared across dialects to denote transportation and ing, with sà '' as a ubiquitous term highlighting aquatic subsistence. These lexical patterns illustrate cultural specificity without extensive borrowing in core domains.

Proto-Songhay reconstruction

The reconstruction of Proto-Songhay relies on the applied to the ten or so modern Songhay varieties, identifying regular sound correspondences and shared innovations to posit ancestral forms. This approach, pioneered in Robert Nicolai's 1980s works on dialectal relationships and phonological changes, has been refined in subsequent studies, including those by Abdoulaye Alio in the early , which incorporated detailed Zarma-Songhay data for lexical and morphological verification. Parallels with other , particularly Saharan, aid in confirming reconstructions, while careful exclusion of contact-induced forms from Niger-Congo languages ensures focus on the inherited core. Approximately 200-300 lexical items have been securely reconstructed, alongside key phonological and grammatical features, highlighting Proto-Songhay as a language of settled agriculturalists with urban elements around 2000 years ago. Phonologically, Proto-Songhay featured a five-vowel (*a, *e, *i, *o, *u) with Advanced Tongue Root (ATR) , where [+ATR] vowels triggered across morphemes, a trait lost in most descendant languages due to simplification but inferable from residual patterns and Saharan cognates. The consonant inventory included voiceless and voiced stops (*p, *b, *t, *d, *k, *g), fricatives (*f, *s, *h), nasals (*m, *n, *ŋ), liquids (*l, *r), and glides (*w, *y), with glottal elements like *h lost in southern varieties but preserved in northern ones, as in *hárí ''. Tone was likely phonemic, with high and low registers reconstructible from modern tonal , though stress in some dialects reflects proto-tones. These features position Proto-Songhay within Nilo-Saharan typological norms, including labialized velars in early stages. Grammatically, Proto-Songhay exhibited Subject-Verb-Object (SVO) basic , with postpositions for locative and functions, consistent across modern varieties. Nominal morphology included a tripartite number (singular, via suffixes like *-u, and a singulative or form), and possessive constructions used alienable prefixes reconstructed mainly from Northern Songhay data, such as *n- 'my' (e.g., *n-kéráw 'my hand') and *m- 'your', reflecting a pronominal prefixing pattern more archaic in northern lects like Tasawaq. Verbal structure featured aspectual prefixes (e.g., *ka- for imperfective) and serial constructions, with tense marked by rather than strict affixes. These elements suggest a relatively analytic , with nominal derivation via or compounding. Lexical reconstructions emphasize core vocabulary, with forms like *bòro 'person', *kídòw 'bird', *gí:rí 'year', and *tóndì 'stone/mountain' showing consistent correspondences, such as initial *k- > h- in some dialects. For numerals, *gú 'five' exemplifies tonal and vowel patterns traceable across subgroups, varying slightly in modern forms (e.g., ɡuu in Koyra Chiini, iggu in Zarma). Agricultural terms like *sàŋá 'rice' and urban-related words like *gàndí 'town' are also reconstructible, indicating the proto-speakers' lifestyle. These 200-300 items form the basis for subgrouping, with innovations like metathesis in Western Songhay distinguishing branches.

Historical influences and loanwords

The Songhay languages exhibit extensive lexical borrowing from neighboring language families, reflecting centuries of trade, migration, and political dominance in the Sahel region. In Northern Songhay varieties such as Tadaksahak and Tagdal, Berber languages, particularly Tuareg (Tamasheq), have exerted profound influence, contributing the vast majority of non-basic vocabulary while Songhay provides core inflectional morphology and basic terms. For instance, Tadaksahak retains approximately 300 lexemes of Songhay origin, but most other words, including nouns like aḍánay 'action of filling' and verbs like yíktǝb 'to write', derive from Tamasheq patterns and roots, often in pastoral and cultural domains such as kinship terms (t-a-bóobas-t 'cross cousin, female') and numerals (t-ǝ-méṛw-in 'ten'). This heavy borrowing, estimated to affect over suppletive verb forms and syntactic elements like reflexives (ga from Tamasheq imʒan 'soul'), stems from historical symbiosis between Songhay-speaking groups and Tuareg nomads. In Southern Songhay languages like Zarma and Dendi, influences from Niger-Congo families predominate, with Mande languages providing substantial lexical and grammatical substrate effects, including shared syntax such as serial verb constructions and alienable possession marking. Examples include the word for 'hut' (bùgù), reconstructed to proto-Songhay but paralleled in proto-Mande (bùgú), suggesting early contact layers that may have reshaped core vocabulary. Hausa, a Chadic language, has also contributed borrowings in semantic domains like environment and tools, such as tudu 'hill' and sógólò 'spoon' (from Hausa cokaali), reflecting trade interactions along the Niger River. These Mande and Hausa elements often cluster in basic domestic and agricultural terms, with lower incidence in kinship, where inherited Songhay forms persist. Arabic loanwords entered Songhay during the rise of the (15th–16th centuries), facilitated by Islamic conversion and , primarily affecting religious and administrative vocabulary. Terms like aluula 'noon prayer' (from Arabic ẓuhr) and tímmè 'finish' (from Arabic tamm) illustrate early integrations, often via medieval routes from to . In Northern varieties like Korandje, Arabic reinforces Berber influences in basic vocabulary, comprising part of the 20% non-Songhay items in Swadesh lists. Colonial French introductions from the early added modern administrative and technological terms, frequently mediated through , such as ttili 'television' in Korandje. Borrowing rates vary by semantic domain, with high integration in and (e.g., over 50% Arabic-derived in terms across varieties) but low in core and body parts (under 10% external), underscoring resistance in intimate spheres while adaptation occurs in contact-driven areas like (Berber-heavy) and trade (Hausa-Arabic mix). These loans have occasionally altered proto-Songhay reconstructions, such as in environmental terms where Berber substrates overlay earlier forms.

References

  1. https://www.sorosoro.org/en/songhay-languages/
  2. https://www.languagesgulper.com/eng/Songhay.html
  3. http://www.rogerblench.info/Language/Nilo-Saharan/Saharan/Saharan%20Songhay%20branch.pdf
  4. https://media.corban.edu/hydra/media/files/2019/09/10/southern-songhay-silesr1999_004-1.pdf
  5. https://www.sil.org/system/files/reapdata/36/64/80/36648029545421741991120945854668087601/silesr1999_008.pdf
  6. https://www.ethnologue.com/language/dsq/
  7. https://glottolog.org/resource/languoid/id/song1307
  8. https://pages.sandpoints.org/dotawo/library/Gerrit%20J.%20Dimmendaal/Linguistic%20Features%20and%20Typologies%20in%20Languages%20Commonly%20Referred%20to%20as%20%27Nilo-Saharan%27%20%28143%29/Linguistic%20Features%20and%20Typologies%20in%20Lang%20-%20Gerrit%20J.%20Dimmendaal.pdf
  9. https://aaregistry.org/story/the-songhai-people-of-africa-a-story/
  10. https://www.britannica.com/topic/Songhai-languages
  11. https://shs.hal.science/halshs-03995082/document
  12. https://soas-repository.worktribe.com/OutputFile/417620
  13. https://www.sorosoro.org/en/korandje/
  14. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/A-Historical-Comparative-Reconstruction-of-Ehret/e3c2da4c3063d5d96732de1a0edf6907e9670a59
  15. https://lameensouag.files.wordpress.com/2016/11/souag2012_subclassification_of_songhay_and_its_historical_implications.pdf
  16. https://www.lotpublications.nl/Documents/608_fulltext.pdf
  17. https://academic.oup.com/edited-volume/38608/chapter/334723716
  18. https://aclanthology.org/2024.acl-srw.1.pdf
  19. https://www.ethnologue.com/language/dje/
  20. https://www.djerma.nl/zarma_en/general-info/language.html
  21. https://www.ethnologue.com/language/ses/
  22. https://joshuaproject.net/people_groups/14989
  23. https://www.ethnologue.com/language/khq/
  24. https://joshuaproject.net/people_groups/19220
  25. https://www.songhay.org/static/documents/research/Northern_Songhay-lameen.pdf
  26. https://www.ethnologue.com/language/ddn/
  27. https://www.omniglot.com/writing/dendi.htm
  28. https://joshuaproject.net/people_groups/19221
  29. https://www.ethnologue.com/language/hmb/
  30. https://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/handle/2027.42/117646/Dictionary?sequence=5
  31. https://publication.codesria.org/index.php/pub/catalog/download/141/1227/4145?inline=1
  32. https://archive.aramcoworld.com/issue/201105/from.africa.in.ajami.htm
  33. https://www.degruyter.com/document/doi/10.1515/jall-2012-0008/html
  34. https://api.pageplace.de/preview/DT0400.9783110804850_A19971554/preview-9783110804850_A19971554.pdf
  35. https://www.theswissbay.ch/pdf/Books/Linguistics/Mega%20linguistics%20pack/African/Nilo-Saharan/Tadaksahak%2C%20A%20Grammar%20of%20%28Christiansen-Bolli%29.pdf
  36. https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/cambridge-handbook-of-african-linguistics/linguistic-features-and-typologies-in-languages-commonly-referred-to-as-nilosaharan/76F725609D3A0DC4C1458D918ABF0BE4
  37. https://www.academia.edu/72836726/Grammar_of_Humburi_Senni_Songhay_of_Hombori_Mali_
  38. https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.1515/9783110804850.380/html
  39. http://www.djerma.nl/zarma_en/pronunciationguide/vowels_diphthongs.html
  40. https://www.academia.edu/4269546/Pharyngealization_and_the_vowel_system_of_Tasawaq_Northern_Songhay_2013_
  41. https://www.academia.edu/48466216/On_the_origin_of_some_northern_songhay_mixed_languages
  42. https://press.uchicago.edu/ucp/books/book/distributed/T/bo3686002.html
  43. https://web.stanford.edu/group/cslipublications/cslipublications/site/157586505X.shtml
  44. https://journals.flvc.org/sal/article/view/107302
  45. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/281772222_A_Tasawaq_Northern_Songhay_Niger_Text_with_Grammatical_Notes
  46. https://scholarlypublications.universiteitleiden.nl/access/item%3A2937660/view
  47. https://www.jbe-platform.com/content/journals/10.1075/dia.28.1.01hea
  48. https://www.degruyter.com/document/doi/10.1515/9783110804850/html
  49. https://grambank.clld.org/languages/koyr1240
  50. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/309065291_Comitative-based_causative_constructions_in_Zarma
  51. https://scholarlypublications.universiteitleiden.nl/access/item%3A2937663/view
  52. https://bop.unibe.ch/linguistik-online/article/download/12289/15059/56952
  53. https://www.iaaw.hu-berlin.de/de/-1/afrika_archiv/linguistik-und-sprachen/veranstaltungen/greenberg-workshop/songhay-typology-gone-berzerk/%40%40download/file/Songhay_Jeff_Heath.pdf.pdf
  54. https://books.google.com/books?id=Hs028DVIPPQC&pg=PA88
  55. https://www.omniglot.com/language/numbers/zarma.htm
  56. https://books.google.com/books?id=Hs028DVIPPQC&pg=PA17
  57. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/269614042_The_subclassification_of_Songhay_and_its_historical_implications
  58. https://doi.org/10.1075/jpcl.32.2.03ben
Add your contribution
Related Hubs
User Avatar
No comments yet.