University of Nigeria

Author
              Research Publications 

TORKULA, Veronica Avenda

PG/MA/86/4222
Title

Language Standardization processes in Tiv

Faculty

Arts
Department

Linguistics and Nigerian Languages

Date

January, 1991
Signature

Digitally signed by Fidelia Ngozi Asiegbu

Fidelia Ngozi DN: CN = Fidelia Ngozi Asiegbu, C =

NG, O = University of Nigeria, OU =
University Library

Asiegbu Reason: I have reviewed this document

Date: 2008.10.07 09:42:58 +01'00'
LANGUAGE STANDARDIZATION PROCESSES I N T I V

A PROJECT REPORT
SUBMITTED TO THE DEPARTYSNT O F
LIKGUISTICS NIGER1L.K LAXGUAGES
U N I V E R S I T Y O F N I G E R I A , NSUKKA

I N PARTIAL
F U U ILMENT O F THE REQU IREIGFT
F O R TEE AWARD OF TEE DEGREE Or"\
IIBSTERS IN LINGUISTICS

MRS VERONICA AVZNDA TOFXULA

(REG. NO, ~ ~ / M X / 8 6 / 4 2 2 2 )

SUPERVISOB: DR P A T NDUKWE

JANUARY, I991 .
 CZRTIFICATIOX

f.ir& Veronica Avenda Torkula, a p o s t g r a d u a t e s t u d e n t

i n t h e d e p a r t z e n i of L i n g u i s t i c s and Nigerian Languages

w i t h Reg. KO. l?G/MA/86/4222 has s a t i s f a c t o r i l y completed

t h e requirements f o r course and r e s e z r c h work f o r t h e degree

of Masters i n L i n g u i s t i c s .

The t:ork contained i n t h i s t h e s i s is o r i g i n a l and h a s

n o t been submitted, e i t h e r i n part o r f u l l f o r any degree o r

diplonia i n t h i s o r any o t h e r u n i v e r s i t y .

.I P r o f e s s o r 3. ' p l d k p e
Head of Departmert Supervisor

U n i v e r s i t y of Nigeria
Nsukka
 iii

DSXCATED

TO :

Mama Veronica Nginkaa Torkula Amah, my patient, s o f t

spoken and pence-loving mother-in-lati who departed t h i s world

on 8 t h March 1 9 8 9 ~

Ymther, all around you was always calm, l o v i n g and

p e a c e f u l as your kind n a t ~ r en e v e r thought of revenge o r

wickedness.

May your loving s o u l e v e r r e s t in p e r f e c t peace w i t h God.

 ACKNO\L'LEDGEIGNT

I wish t o e x p r e s s my g r a t i t u d e t o t h o s e who s a w t o t h e

m a t e r i a l i z a t i o n of t h i s ~ i o r k . F i r s t i s D r P a t Ndukwe, my

su~ervisc:, I n f a c t , 1 would have d i s c o n t i n u e 6 w i t h t h i s

programme a f t e r my course work, b e a r i n g i n mind a l l t h e problems

I was f a c i n g , b u t with h i s s c h o l a r l y a d v i c e and a l l t h e necessary

s u p p o r t one would need i n an academic world, I was a b l e t o c a r r y

o u t t h i s p r o j e c t work.

My s i n c e r e thanks a l s o g0e.s t o all. t h e l e c t u - r e r s ~LI 1 ; ~

department. D r (Mrs) C l a r a Ikekeonl~.v, f o r one, always had w

t o p i c i n mind d u r i n g h e r l i b r a r y h o a r s , t h u s p r o v i d i n g me w i t h
s
a l l relevat r e f e r e n c e s a v a i l z b l e in t h e l i b r a r y . Others,

l i k e Plr .:1 Iwtrndu and M r Nwadike generously l e n t m e books

I needed f o r t h i s topic.

Ky g r a t i t u d e a l s o extends t o rcy husband, H.R.H. A.A. Torlala

The Tor-Ti< I V f o r t h e f i n a n c i a l and moral support he rendered

t o me d u r i n g t h e course of w r i t i n g t h i s p r o j e c t . Alco f o r

t h o s e who h e l d me in h i c h esteem d u r i n g p r a y e r s , I a l s o s a ~
thank y o u . These i n c l u d e Rev. Fr. P'ichael Akure and Rev. Fr.

David Aguh who accepted and o f f e r e d church p r a y e r s f o r a

s u c c e s s f u l c o a p l e t i o n of ray course.

My s p e c i a l thanks e q ~ a l l ygoes t o Mrs Ngunan Anweh, who

took t h e motherly r o l e of p r o v i d i n g f o r my c h i l d r e n ' s needs in

my absence a d who always a s s i s t e d me both f i n a n c i a l l y a d

morally a l l through the p e r i o d of my course.

 PRZFACE

L a n s a g e s , Tiv i n c l u d e d , arc u s u a l l y c h a r a c t e r i s e d by
d i h l e c t a l v a r i a t i o n mostly markec! by gramctatlc,?l and v s c z b u l ~ y

chaagcs. But f o r some obscure r e s s o n T i v s p e a k e r s g e n e r a l l g

b e l i e v e t h a t t h e r e a r e no d i a l e c t s in t h e langusge because of t h e

almost t o t a l mutual h t e l l i g i b i l i t y t h a t e x i s t 6 mong the various

Tiv communities.

It would a p p e a r then t h a t t h e r e would be l i t t l e need f o r

s t a d a r d i z a t i o n work in t k e language. The ~ i i x a t i o ni s unusual

a n d i s t h e main m o t i v a t i o n f o r this 6tudy, which a t t e m 2 t s a

d e s c r i p t i o n and a n a l y s i s of 1 a n p e . g e s t a n d a r d i z a t i o n p r o c e s s e s

n T i . The work, which i s as comprehensive as can b e achicvocl

.
c o n s t r a i n e d as i t i s by t h e extremely ~ c a n t ym a t e r i a l s on t h e

s u b j e c t s , i~d i v i d e d i n t o f i v e c h a p t e r s . , Chaptey 1 c .~ & .n e s the

t b e o r e t i c a l c o n s i d e r a t i o n s u n d e r i y i n g l a g u z g e p l a n n i n g and

langurge s t z n d a r d i z a t i o n i n g e n e r a l . Chapter 2 d i o c u s s e s t k ~

h i s t o r i c a l backgrouxd t o l a n ~ q a g es t a n d a r d i z a t i o n in Tiv.
v
Chapter 3 examines t h e l i n m i s t i c issuecs u n d e r l y i n g Tiv crthogr=phy

and c h a p t e r 4 complements t h i s with a l o o k a t t h e I S o c i o c u l t u r a l '

dinensions ( o f f i c i a l s t a t u s , educational functions, r o l e in

p u b l i s h i n g and b r o a d c a s t i n g , e t c ) of Tiv language s t a n d a r d i z a t i o n ,

Chapter 5 p r o v i d e s an assessment of what h a s been done s o far

and g e n e r a l rccommendationc.

A s we have a l r e a d y n o t e d , w o r k on Tiv s t a n d a r d i z a t i o n i s

v e r y s c a n t y and '
t i s hoped t h a t t h i s s t u d y would s e r v e t o

s t i m u l a t e f u r t h e r i n t e r e s t i n the process.
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

Title page O O o O D D O D D i
Certification O.O o O O 010 ii
Dedication 000 o m * a.m
--.
211

Acknowledgements ... o.. (1 iv

Preface 000 .> . 0 v
Table of Contents O.O OO. . vii
CHDTm ONE: LANGUAGE AND LANGUAGX STANDARDIZATION

1.0 Introduction o m *
O O . 0

1.1 Language OO. 000

S .2 Lmguage Standardization (LS)

1.2.1 Approaches to LS ...
o a 0

1.2,2 L6 Strategies D O 0 O . r

?.-2=3Ltj and Language Plaadng (IP)

1.2.4 I$ Evaluation o.O e P o .

2.2.5 Motivation tor L3 o r n o O.C

%9 3 Methodology * O D ‘,.a

1.4 Assumptions and Hypotheses of the Study

CFa-'sEf 3W
!O : BKKGROlTD TO W G U A G E STAXDARE1ZATION
#
IB TIV E

290
n
&!?cation O D D ... 0 0 5

2.3, b i g i n and Migration

..
O
.. o . ~

2.2 Dialectal Variations in Tiv ori

.-
zt5 5 ~%.onologicalVariation O.O ##o
&9'3.1'l Segmental Phonemes
F
r o e

..
O D *

2 e . 3 0 . 4 0 ~ Suprasegmental Phonemes
1 %
?:.

2 - 5 2 L8xical Variation O.O O.C

2.3.5 Eyntactic Variation OO. o r 5

4 Early Attempts on the Study of Tiv and Tiv -LS

2.4.3 Language Planning Agencies , .. .,. 23
2.'4.1,1 Individual Agents 23
...
O o O a**

24.2 Group (Official) Ageats o.V 26

2.5 Present State of Affairs ... o 27

CTWTER THREE: LT.NGUISTIC ISSUES IN T I E STAN DARDIZA-

'PION OP 'PIV 29

3.9 Introduction o ma o.. ... 75

3.1 The Tiv Alphabet o o o .
O o.- 29
3.1.1 VoweL: .*. ... 30
...
orno

-I 3
3.1. Consonants
5.2 Spelling Rules ...
0.. om.

O.O

#
, / C

33
3.3 Tone-Marking 00. 0
. 0
.
. 34
Q ~ E R 'PIV LANGUAGE STANDARDIWTION: THE
~ FOUR:
SOCIOCULTURAL DIMENSION
+.l The Status of T i v ...
...
O.o

1 . 1 The National Level

4 .k2 The State Level . 1

...
O
.
.

4.A.2.1 Biucation O.o

4.9.ke12.2
Broadcasting O
. .
O

4 r.le203Publisning o m * 000 9 s 45
C F m E R FIVE: ASSESSMENT AND CONCLUSION 47
I'XEFEmCES . *- 0
.. 0
.
. 0.6 !. 9
A
~CPP~-D?X a*. O
. cse 57
 GWER

FIG. 2 : THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT AREAS UNDER TIV SECTION OF b

BENUE STATE.
 CHN"L'LfH-. ONE-

LANGUAGE AND LANGUAGE STAN3hRi)IZATION

I .0 INT2OXiCTION

The i m s o r t m c e o f language s t a n d a r d i z a t i o r h N i g e r i a

csll n o t be overemphasized as varioufi e f f o r t s have bee2 made

i n t h i s d i r e c t l o n a l o n g different d i n e n s i o n s on b d i g e n o u s

lanpa.ge.

The F e d e r d l A i n i s t r y of Educti"uon, for' i.nstunce,

o r g ~ r n i z c da T e r m i n o l o ~ yWorki.hap in Ocloli~.~./Novombor1978

aimed at c o m p i l i n g an o f f i c i a l . s t a n d a r d i s e d g l o s s a r y of

s c i e n t i f i c as w e l l as t e c h n i c a l t e r m i n o l o ~ i e sf o r t h e prf-mury

s c h o o l c:-5culum i n nine N i g e r i a n l a n g u a g e s including l i v .

*
O t h e r s were K a n u r i , Igbo, Yoruba, Ha~xsa, F u l f u d e , I j o , Ef*
1
and Edo. E f f o r t s at language s t a n d a r d i z a t i o n we even more

prori:ir.ei~t a t t h e ~ t a t el e v e l i n l i n e w i t h t h e h p l e m e n t a t i o n

of t h e National Policy on E d u c a t i o n , which requires t h a t t h e

mother-tongue b e used as t h e nediurn o f instruction A

b the

initial s t a g e s of t h e p r i m a r y school system.

..7
I n Benue S t a t e , t h e t h r e e major l m g u a g e s , ~ a o m a , I g d a ,
, .
and T i v a r e t o s e r v e t h i s purpose. But l i k e any n a t u r a l

language, t h e s e lansages are spoken w i t h many v a r i a t i o n s i n

phonology, m o r p h o l o ~ ~and
, syntax, thus c o n s t i t u t i n g the

v a r i o u s d b d e c t s a s t i o c i a t e d w i t h each. There h a v e b e e n

numerous ~ t t e m p t smade a t s t a n d a r d i z i n g them, a t least i n

the written form. However, t h i p uib.dY is o n l y concerned w i t h - 1
p r o v i d i n g a d e s c r i p t i o n a d =alysis of e f f o r t s t h a t have been

nzde t o s t a n d a r d i z e t h e Tiv l a g u a , r e ,
 2

But b c f o r c we delvc i n t o the d e t a i l s of s t a n d a r d i x a t j - o n

e f f o r t s , w e would b r i e f l y examine what t h e l i c & t i i s t i c

literature has on t h e t e r m s 'Language1 an2 'Language

S t m d a r d i z a t i o n l , p a r t i c u l m l g a s t h e y r e l a t e t o each o t h e r .

?.A WGUAGX

There have been v a r y i n g views on t h e term 'language'

e x p r e s s e 2 L y d i f l e r e n t schoois of thought b u t we f o c u s here

on vdews of languzge which arc r e l e v a n t t o t h e pa-ocehs of

-
standardization.

Haugen (1 971 : 281-29S), f o r i n s t a n c e , argue& t h z t

*lan&wagel fs an f n n a t e p r o p e r t y or^ man - not a nanipulable

tool - internal t o hja and n o t an e x t e r n a l o b j e g t which c-

be reshaped a t w i l l as, f o r example, one can r e f a o h i o n a

hamner. He f u r t h e r e n p h a s i s e s t h e slow n a t u r e o f l i n @ i c ; t i c
change. Haugen r i g h t l y p o i n t s out f u r t h e r t h a t for any

i n c o v a t i o n t o be s u c c e s s f u l t h e r e i s need for i t s general

acceptance. Apparently, this position argues for tllg social

nature of lan,cuzge which t h i s s t u d y i n t e n d s t o elaphasize.

I n ti-e area of s o c i ~ l j n ~ u i s t i c slanguage

, values are

g e n e r a l i y assumed t o i n t e r w e a v e w i t h s o c i a l as well as

cul t u r a 3 v a l u e s and, of course, a r e only said tta b e

'Language i n t e r a c t s w i t h every a s p e c t of huz.a

life i n s o c i e t y , and i t can be understood o n l y
i f i t i s cozisidered in r e l a t i o n t o society. r 2
 'Lasage' is t h u s viewed as

ol c o r m u n i c ~ t i o nin t h e p e r i o d and

i t i s used and a l s o the product of

source o f i t s f u t u r e d e v e l o p ~ e n t . '

In fact, i t is significant at
every i d e n t i f i a b l e l i n g u i s t i c form

w r i t t e n , i s imbued with s o c i a l and

speakers, so t h a t language p l a n n i n

conceived and e v a l u a t e d i n terms o

attempts t o r e l a t e speakers' needs

c u l t u r a l values. H e m e , 6 s Xdulcwe
existence of lszguage g r e a t l y depe

p o s s i b i l i t ? e s of i t s use, as t h e v

t o i t depends on t h e n a t u r e and qu

In an attempt t o g i v e a w i d e r

irAits ~ o c i dc o n t e x t , r e c e n t e o c i
therefore, r e v e z l t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p

t s o c i e t y ' as complex and m ~ l t i l e v e l .suc!: th.t t b $ ~

-
r e l a t i o n s h i p is c o r r e l a t a b l e along s e v e r a l dinensions:

socio-culturd, s o c i o p s y c h o l o g i c d , p ~ y c h o l i r t g ustic
i as well
as e t h n o l i n g u i s t i c . A l l these dimensions are relevant to

d i f f e r e n t degrees i n t h e p r o c e s s of standardization. This

essay, howevcr, focusses mainly on t h e s o c i o - c u l t u r a l

1.2 LANGUAGE STAXDAR3IZATIOFi (Ls)
2 7 APPROACHES TO LS

A s t a n d a r d has bccn d o f i n c d a6 something t h a t 5.::

' e s t a b l i s h e d by a u t h o r i t y , custozi o r g e n e r a l consent as a model

o r example t o be followed' and s t a n d a r d i z a t i o n as t h e 'act,

p r o c e s s o r r e s u l t of s t a n d a r d i z i n g ' (Webster 1971). Although

s t a n d a r d i z a t i o n i s more coimonly a s s o c i a t e d w i t h i r i d u s t r i a l

,
a c t i v i t : ~ t h e n o t i o n may be extended t o o Lher s p h e r e s i ~ c l - ~ l . C i n ;

h u m m language. For, s t a n d a r d i z a t i o n i s u s u a l l y an at t e ~ tg

t o e s t a b l i s h o r d e r and u n i f o r m i t y i n s i t u a t i o n s of p o t e n t i e l
d i s a r r a y , r e s u l t i n g in a b a s i s f o r measurement or a model.
The v a r i a b i l i t y t o be found i n hbman language h a s t h i t i

d i s r u p t i v e p o t e n t i a l , hence t h e need f o r ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~on.

A s t a n d a r d language in t h e sease uoed in t h f s study is

one p o s s e s s i n g a d i a l e c t "which h n s g a i n e d l i t e r a r y and cultural

supremacy o v e r t h e o t h c r d i d e c t s ... as t h e most proper form

of that l a g u a g e " , ( ~ e an6

i Gaynon 1970:203). L8 ;Ls t h e
'process of one variety of a language bec011ii11~;
- .wi(Icly

accepted throughout t h e spee c ! ' ~corrmcni ty as a s u p r a d i a l e c t a l

norm' (Ferguson 1968:224). LS t h e r e f o r e r e f e r s t o the p r o c e m

of providing a standard ' d i a l e c t ' o r v a r i e t y f o r an

u n s t m d a r d i z e d language.

A l h n ~ p z g emay be s t w l d a r d i z e d a l o n g t h e spoken o r k ~ i k t c n

mode o r both. The epoken form o f a l a n g u a ~ ei s n o t o r i o u s l y

l e s s amenable t o s t a n c l a r d i z a t i o n t h a n t h e written form, and

most a t t e m p t s a t LS, h c l u d i n g that of Tiv, have tended to

c ~ n c e n t r a t eon t h e w r i t t e n form. Scc0115l.y~ LS may be planned
(Le. c z r r i e d o u t by recognised, n o t n e c e s s a r i l y o f f i c i a l ,

a g e n c i e ~ )o r unplmned ( i . e . developing in a natural,

h i s t o r i c a l l y d e t e r L n e d manner). The l a t t e r p r o c e s s i s u s u d l y

amorphous &r,< diPIicrJ t t o study systematically, while the

f o r a e r can be more conveniently and s y s t e m a t i c a l l y s t u d i d -

XC could even be t h e c a s e t h a t t h e nature of t h e LS agencies

involved - t&.ing i n t o account t h e i r m e ~ b e r s h i pand modes oc

opration - c o n s t i t u t e a s i g n i f i c a n t v a r i a b l e in i n f l u e n c i n g

o r p r e d i c t i n s t h e e f f e c t i v e n e s s of t h e s t a n d z r d i z a t i o n p r o c n ~ a .

As w i l l be demonstrated below t h i s appears t o be s t r o n g l y

case w i t h regard t o Tiv LS. It should be p o i n t e d out, thougll,

t t a t even where t h e r e i s d e l i b e r a t e planning soae amount of

unplanned s t a n d a r d i z a t i o n goes on and vice-versa, There ars

some languaczs f o r which p l a n n i n g is very s t r i c t and rigAd1y

t 5 f orced (e * g , Czcchoslbvakia bef are plasnofit and 1-,

mad t h o s e for which such s t r i c t n e s s eacl ri$d enforee@oct is

n ~ t et n a b l e (eaG. the French Academy and, as we s h d l t j e e ~%.'J).

T h i s is probably carrelatable t a t h e n a t u r e of t h e $ c l l k i c & l

Ciiid social i n s t f t u t i o n s (0.g. 'democratic*, 'authoritrj?i;*izl,

,+-+'
or t o t a l i t a r i a n ) of t h e s o c i e t i e s concerned ( Ndukw6 : I $69 :7 1 ) r
ZZ i s nore d i f f i c u l t t o e n f o r c e language d e c i s i o n s d~mo2~at.i~

t h a n t h e other kinds of s o c i e t y .

??&Z LS STRATEGIES
LS may be undertaken in e i t h e r 01 t w o nai:? w a p . !!W
.A-.
i ~ r s hmethod Anvalves t h e s e l e c t i o n o r e l e v a t i o n bf e?zs Y : . P ~ J ~
o u t ol a corrqetimg number of v a r i e t i e s , w h i l e t h e eoccind method

a t t e a p t s t o c r e a t e a composite of a l l t h e main varieties o r

dialects, The f i r s t netho2, h i o m as t h e U n i t a r y method, h a s

been adozted w i t h s u c c e s s on v c r f o u s languages (such as Yoruba,

Bausa, E n g l i s h , S w a h i l i ) and t h e second method, t h e compoaitiullal

method, has been adopted s u c c e s s f u l l y i n Shona, Luyia, Norwegian

and u n s u c ~ e s j f ~ l li yn 'Union I g b o t .

The Unitary method is f a r more s t r a i g h t f o r w a r d than t h e

co:;lyositional method f o r obvious reasons. Commonly adopted

p o l i c i e s r e l a t i n g t o t h e unitary method are: (a) t h e choice of

t h e cost highly regarded v a r i e t y , o r (b) theechoice of a v a r i e t y

et the poinZ of e n t r y of o u t s i d e 'influence.

It ic the unitary method t h a t h a s been adoptcd for Tiv a&

w i l l be shown below - t h e Kparev d i a l e c t being thc @naturalc

cLoige because i t has h i s t o r i c a l l y been the most highly regarded

Tiv variety. Tiv has t h e r e f o r G been s p a r e d t h e debslitatbg

c o n t r o v e r s i e s t h a t h a s b e d e v i l l e d LS in soxe l a n p a g e s ( e . g . ~gbo).

7.2.3 LS AN3 LANGUAGE PLmiING (LP)

LS i s a b a s i c type of 19. It i s row comconly a g r e e d t h a t

bwguage can be planned - i.e. i t 6 c o u r s e of d e v e l o p e n t

determined though d e l i b e r a t e i n t e r v e n t i o n - and t h a t LS is a

fype of such planning.

It is therefore n o t s u r p r i s i n g t h c t i s s u e s of concern ~LI

theory would have s i g n i f i c a , n t e I f c c t s on LS and v i c e vesca~ 1

Cn? such iasue of fundamental s i g n i f i c a n c e i s whether LP is

~ ' or a
b a s i c a l l y purelg l l i n g u itic 'socid.ly-ba;~;c.ii'a c t i v i t y .
The weight of opinion seem t o favour the view t h a t l i n g u i s t i c

factors - o r p u r e l y l i n g u i s t i c concerns - c o n s t i t u t e just one

v a r i a b l e among o t h e r , p o s s i b l y , e q u a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t v a r i s b l e s :

p o l i t i c a l , econoaic, e d u c a t i o n d , e t c . This i s a p o s i t i o n t h a t

is d s o z:iopted i n t h i s essay, An assessment of t h e outcoizie o:r

a4.u b e r ~ p t sa t t h e ~ t ~ d a r d i z a t i oofn t h i s langu.a&e c h i b e s t be
J-

judged n o t only w i t h r e s p e c t t o linguistic i s s u e s ( e x t e n t of

v z r i z t l o n , orthograghy, e t c ) b u t c r u c i a l l y a l s o t o t h e

' s o c i s c u l t u r a l v context. Tha s o c i o c u l t u m l context i n t k i ~

case r e l a t e s t o t h e official s t a t u s of Tiv a t b o t h n a t i o n d .

." .' . L

and state l e v e l s w i t h res;;ect t o t h e functi.on o r domain of

trade, r e l i g i o n and education as well as t h e p r i n t rind b r o a d c a ~ t

media, The assumption here i s t h a t no m a t t e r how w e l l liceuictic

issues a r e h=ciled in LS, a l a c k of s e n s i t i v i t y t o , o r

c o n s i d e r a t i o n o f , these f a c t o r s would l e a d t o i n e f f e c t f veness

if n o t doknrisht f a i l u r e .

1.&4 LS EVALUATION
It i s extremeiy d i f f i c u l t t o e v a l u a t e t h c e x t e n t of LS

in a l a n s u a ~ e . There are s e v e r a l r e a s o n s f o r t h i s , A first

i ~ m e d i a t ereason has t o do w i t h the f a c t t h a t eveo i f t h e t e r m

'standard' r e f a r s t o a v w i c t y as a whole, LS through planning

cun only be done on part6 of l u l ~ u a g cat a t i m e . I t i c not

easy to decide when a planned s t a n d a r d h a s evolved from the

incipient stage to the established st%-c. For many flfri.ctu:

languages, Tiv i n c l u b d , t h e p r o h l c ~i s confounded by t h e f a c t

t h a t t h e 'study' of the 1ane;u;"ec by early miosionaries and '-

c o l o n i a l o f f i c i a l went hand i n h a d with some a m o u s t 02
s t a n d a r d i e a t i m , p a r t i c u l a r l y graphizatioc.

Secondly, LS i s n o t a m o n o l i t h i c p r o c e s s b u t has c o n s t i t u t i v e

coniponents, D i f f e r e n t a u t h o r s have suggested d i f f e r e n t

c o i ~ p o n c n t sf o r the procosc ( e w e wHaugen (1383) refers t o r i ~ J ~ c t . ? o n

.*. -- o f form, elabcration of f u n c t i o n and

of norm, codificat5.on

acceptance by t h e community; Ferguson (1966) s e e s LS as one s t a c e

Out of a t h r e e - s t a g e Developaent, The o t h e r two s t a g e s a r e

G r a p h i z a t i o n arrd Noderaization) , Although no co:mitment t o a

p a r t i c u l a r model is a s s u e d in t h i s e s s a y , t h a t o f Ansre (1974)

seeas more r e l e v a n t t o t h e Tiv s i t u a t i o n ; v i z : choice of standard'

d i a l e c t o r v a r i e t y , g r a p h l z a t i o n - a n d modernization. m e SiLk

of LS-related work in Tiv r e l a t e s t o g r a p h i z a t i o n ( t h e d e v i s i n g

of g r a p h i c s y n b o l s t o r e p r e s e n t t h e s2oken form, t h e s e t t l i n g

of o r t h o g r a p h i c d . problems and t h e p r o d u c t i o n of t e x t b o o k s ,

newspapers and o t h e r kinds of l i t e r a t ~ r e( ~ n s r e1974:371). As

y e t e f f o r t i s c o n c e n t r a t e d on such telement:?.ryv i s s u e s as t h e

proper grzphemic represer1tatj.m of cert5.i.n problem sounds and

sound sequences and t h e p r o v i s i o n of adequate s p e l l i n g r u l e s

f o r g r a m a t i c a . 1 forms &id c o n s t r u c t i o n s . As we have n o t e d above,

t h e choice of a d i a l e c t t o s e r v e as a b a s i s f o r a standard

v a r i e t y i s u n c o ~ t r o v e r s i a li n Tiv, Very l i t t l e has been done

by cay of n o d e r n i z a t i o n ( t h e c r e a t i i i g o r borrowing o f new l e x i c a l

i t c a s a n d t h e i r i n c o r p o r a t i o n i n t o t h e basic s t a n d a r d (Ansre 1
1974:371), t h a t i s , apart from t h e Tiv c o n t r i b u t i o n t o t h e

g l o s s a r y of s c i e n t i f i c anc? technical terms prepared by the

 F e d e r a ~overnrnent.' Evaluation of Tiv LS can ocly be c a r r i e d

o u t with regard t o t h e adequacy o r e f f e c t i v e n e s s of t h e

- recoinnendations an t h e orthography by t h e v a r i o u s a g e n c i e s

( i n d i v i d u a l s m d o f f i c i a l b o d i e s ) t h a t have concerned t h e n s e l v e ~

with t h e language,

A t h i r d problem underlying t h e e v a l u a t i o n of LS in a

p a r t i c u l a r lanmage i s the n o n - a v a i l a b i l i t y of s u i t a b l e , widely

accepted c r i t e r i a . Carvin (1964) proposes t h a t s t a n d a r d

varieties can be evalutited and conpared in t e r n s of c e r t a i n

p r o p e r t i e s , f u n c t i o n s and t h e a t t i t u d e s t h e s e functions e l i c i t

f r o 3 members of t h e speech c o m u n i t y , Two jatr5nsic and i d e a l

p o s e r t i e s z r e suggested: ~ l e x i b l he t a b i l i t ~tb-e
~ require~ent

t h a t a lm;.pu~e be a t a b i l i s e d by a p p r o p r f a t e c o d i f i c a t i o n an6

t h a t t h e c o d i f i c a t i o n be i d e a l enouch t o a l l o w for m o d i f i c a t i o n

-
in l i n e with c u l t u r a l change; and i n 2 e k l e c t u a. l i z a t i o n , t h e
requirement of i n c r e a s i n g accuracy along an ascending s c a l e of

f u n c t i o n a l ' d i a l e c t s p , from c o n v e r s a t i o n a l t o scientific. Both

p r o p e r t i e s a r e s G d t o be gradual i n d i s t i n c t i o n and q u a n t i f i a b l e .

The f u z ~ t i o n sa r e f i r s t l y , a unifying one which s e r v e s t o

e l i c i t f e e l i n g s of belonging t o g e t h e r among t h e various dialects

speakers ire a speech c o m u n i t y ; secondly, a s e p a r a w f u n c t i o n

which s e t s t h e speech community a p a r t from t h e other speech

c o r n u n i t i e s due t o the powerful (emotionaUy charged) s y n b o l i c

r o l e of the s t a n d a r d language; a Prestige f u n c t i o n which serves

t o i d e o l o g i s e the language by according i t high s y n b o l i c s t a t u s ;

and a Frame-of-Reference f u n c t i o n which s e t s t h e s t a n d a r d

l w g u a g e up as a standard of c o r r e c t n e s s by p r o v i d i n s a c o d i f i c

n o r n which s e r v e s as a yabdstick f o r judgement.

These f u n c t i o n s z i v c r i c e t o a s e t of c u l t u m l attitudes

towards t h e s t a d a r d . The u n i f y i n g and separatist functions

exicournge a f e e l i n g of lan,qunrre l o y a l t y by t h e p r o t e c t i v e

defensive s e n t i m e n t s they g e n e r a t e towards t h e standard Zanguat

me p r e s t i g e f u n c t i o n engenders a f e e l i n s of p r i d e i n t h e

possession of such a v a r i e t y . The frame-of-reference functlon

a c t i v e t e s an awareness-of-norm as a r e s u l t of t h e c o n s t a n t

r e f e r e n c e t o i t as a y a r d s t i c k f o r judgement.

A s t h e s e are the n o s t detailed and comprehensive

s
set of

c r l t e r i a f o r evaluating LS a v a i l a b l e , a c o n s i d e r a t ion of t h e

p o s i t i o n of Tiv i n r e l a t i o n t o them and o t h e r suggested c r l t e r :

will be reserved f o r t h e concluding chapter. Suffice it to no*

here though t h a t , even assuming t h a t a polarizattoa of ' f o l k '

a d 'stmdard' v a r i e t i e s i s tenable, t h e above p r ~ p e r t i e s ,

f u n c t i o n s and attitudes
.
provide no quantitative yardstick
. A
for
d i f f e r e n t i r t i n g then i f t h e r e i s no clear-cut q -u a s t a t i v e

difference. Pareover, t h e r e i s no r e c o g n i t i o n o f $titermediate

s t c g e s in LS such as Ferguscn (1962) provides, viz: st0,

'a languase i n which t h e r e i s no jmpcrtaf.t m o u n t of standardi

-
*ion1 e.g. Kurdish, Xanuri and Tiv(?); st', refers t o uniuodd

e.g. standard B r i t i s h E n g l i ~ h , o r bLaodal, e . g . Greek D h h o t i k

and Xhaterevvsr, Standard forms; and st2, which r e f e r s to * : ' . d e ~ ~ - t

standardizafLcn, i.e. 'a language which hza a single, widely-

accepted nor= f e l t t o be a p p r o p r i a t e with only minor modifications

 11

o r v a r i a t i o n s f o r all purposes f o r which t h e lan=;uagc io w e d

(e,g, Swedish, where i t is clained t h a t the d i f f e r e n c e between

the w r i t t e n a n d spoken form i s m t n b a l ) .

1,2,5 WYIVLTION TOR LS

LS arises in 80 many d i f f e r e n t k i n d s 6f s i t u a t i o n t h a t
t h e r e i s no single ~otivationf o r i t , r a t h e r f a c t o r s moti.vatin,-

t h e process are en v a r i e d as t h e situations Sn whfch i t a r i s e s .

For ex=-ple, Garvin and h t h i a t (1960) e s t a b l i s h a link between

u r b a n i s s t i o n and the rise of s t w d a . r d languages, This i m p l i e s

t h a t non-standard v a r i e t i e s are n e c e s s a r i l y l i n k e d d t h mra2

culture. This p o s i t i o n i s d i f f i c u l t t o maintain, L e i t h (1983) '

links t h e rim of s t a n d a r d v a r i e t i e s t o t h e d e v e l o p ~ e n tof

c e n t r a l i s e d , modern s t a t e s while Baugen c o r r e l a t e e t h e growth

of s t a n d a r d languages with t h e rise of feelings of p a t i o : l d i s m F

' t h e n a t i o n a l i d e a l demands t h a t t h e r e be a s i n g l a l i n g u i s t i c

code by means o f which this communication can take p l a c e (p.328),

It seems impossible t o Sink LS exclusively t o m y s i n g l e

factor. Rubin (1970) a t t e q t s t o avoid this p i t f a l l by p r o v i d l n a

a sociogsjrchologicGL nodel. for LS motivtition as represeated

d i a g r w c a t i c a l l y below:

Ithrough
u
L-
n i f o r n a t i
.- -.. . --
o n
t
I
!
It i s p o s s i b l e t o lump t o g e t h e r a l l p o s s i b l e impuLses toward

LS under 'Rapid S o c i a l Change1. C e r t a i n l y i n t h e case of Tiv,

t h e nee6 f o r s t a d a r d i z a t i o n h a s n o t been a c u t e l y f e l t u n t i l

recently. While t h i s i n p u l s e i s s t r o n g l y conditioned by t h e

diseatisfaction ~ 5 t ht h e poor perfornsnce of T i v i n t h e

e d u c a t i o n a l and o t h e r domains, i t i s s a f e t o suggest t h a t t h l s

dissatisfaztFon i s c l o s e l y linked t o t h e modernization o f t h e

society. However, even i f organised s t m d s r d i z a t i o n e f f o r t s i n

t h e language may hsve been impelled by r a p i d s o o i a l change, i t

is a moot p o i n t whether i t i s t h e intermediate components:

r e c o g n i t i o n of l i n g u i s t i c diversity, d i v e r s i t - y ijeon 9s adverse

#

a d b e n e f i t s seen througk uniformation, t h a t have l e d t o o r g a n i s e d

s t ~ d a r 6 i z a t i o n . This p o i n t w i l l be taken up again in t h e

coacluding chapter .
There i s p r a c t i c a l l y n o t h i n g t h a t has been published that

a d d r e s s e s t h e issue of Yiv standardieatLon d i r e c t z y , T h i s has

made i t necessary t o r e l y mainly on i n t e r v i e w and extra-%%rary

m a t e r i a l f o r research on this p r o j e c t . Two main s o u r c e s of

i n f o m a t i o n were r e l l e d upon: (a) primary source n a t e r b ~ l

( b ) interviews.

Primmy source m a t e r i a l s included unpu'cJli~hcdW O F ~ E ,oh

Tiv which had t o be t r a c e d an2 l o c a t e d i n p r i v a t e ' l i b r a r i a s ' ,

But the most significant of such m a t e r i a l s were the f i l e s ahd 1

papers o f t h e A d d o c Comrnittee on TLv language. The coma

s e c r e t a r i a t was kind enough t o l e t t h e researcher examine

 13
r e c o r d s and made avcdJ.cblc a copy of t h c i r report submitted i n

1980 t o the Benue State Government.

The i ~ t e r v i c w swere the mst time-consuming and difficult
because neaberc of the Ad-Soc Cornittee and others i n t e r e s t e d

in the development of Tiv had t o be located a t vrtrious p l a c e s

and interviewed - intcreatingby soze o r thex are hardly l i t e r a t e ,

The c h a i r m a 3f the cormit%ee, Dr J.O. Nyiekura, was p r t l c u l a r l y

belpf ul .
A l l the same one C & D ~ Oh ~e l p being struck by t h e p a v < i % ~

of material on Tiv LS. T h i s , the researcher did n0.t an&;,~hjnts,

iT+wever, l i t t l e a s i t i s , i t rrobably shoul? be o l i n t e r a s

discovcr how much standardization has been carried o u t i n t h e

,
.
lznguage, thereby pointing the way to what remwLna to Ge done*

1.4 ASSUMPTIONS AhTD HYPOTBESES OF THE STUDY

Certain assumptlons/hypotheses have guided tho w G K %%hh

probzbly need to be made e x p l i c i t . (e.) Language, as &as already

been indicated above, 5.8 seen as a social process, 2;; j u ~ tan

&a.t.rsct, inental e n t i t y . It i s thue i n h e r e n t l y v a r i a b k , a d

% planning is an atterzpt to 'fix' changeable and sedetlAee

net-ircll-understood farms.

C U ~ Y context,
~ C ~ not as ;some thing to be added on t o thG .7.*6n&3a?
stic.
Li?i success or f d l t u r e m a y depend more on e x t r a - l i n p & f k factors
I
+h
~ 4 - n on the inherent linguistic value of rec

(c) F i n a l l y , the nature of the LS agencies,

32 52sups, acting on t h e i r 6wn initiative or

 14
n s t u r e here refers to t h e i r membership, mode of operatLon

and izplementatiofi - is an i n p o r t m t factor dso in d e c i d i n g

the e f f e c t i v e n e s s of the ZS process,
 75

NOTXS TO CHAPTER 7

7,. See Rubin and Jermudd (eds) (7971) for the relevant

argments.
2. The i s s u e is s t 3 . b v e r y nuch controver&.&. For a

atinnkiting account see Weinstein (1980).

3 As an outconic of t h e Terminology Workshop of '3978-

 CHAPTER TWO

BACKGRCUSD TO LPXGUAGE STANDARDIZATION IN T I V

2.0 LOCATION
Tiv is one of the major languages spoken i n &sue State.
Within the state i t s e l f , Tiv c o n s t i t u t e s the mother-tongue ;in

nine oat of the nineteen Local Govcrnmnt Areas, Tne n i n e

l o c a l government areas are: Gboko, Gwer, Guna, K a t s i n a - U q

Kwande, k k u r d i , V e a d e f i y a , Konshisha and Ushongo,

These areas are bourdec! i n the Earth b y Platem a i d Gongolra

S t a t e s , and h the South by Cro~s-River State, The TiL-spc~.x5TiZ

areas chzre a boundary with the Republic of C,urcracS 5B %G East,
I
Figure 7 a d I1 below illustrates the ~ i v - a ~ e ~ . XC %
e a~c

6f Bcnue S t a t e .

2.1 O R I G I N AND MIGAW2lION

There are verious views about the home of origin, and

aigratfon of the Tiv people, Hov~cvcr, mo6i b i s t o r i a s p o s i t

t h a t the Tiv ethnic group migrated from East Africa. 22% i $541,
f o r i n s t a n c e , maintains that the Tivo descended from fbcil& 9XLi.s
-
ilq the Cameroon Republic, generally ce2.led 'Swem' by €be Ti?
peoph, Gbor (1978:13) seen6 to agree w i t h t h i s view, tht i.3
a d&fhrent way by ~ a y i n gthat the T i v peop&e migrated fr@=g W t e

of East, West an2 South A f r i c a , H e i s r a t h e r of th6 s > k L o t l

ti%t 'ihs Tiv people's original horm vafi in c e n t r e AL"li;k, fie

f t r t h c ~p o i n t s out that these people were found between t F Q

Fiyor Congo and t h e River Nile.

 A l l thece v i e y s may have t h e i r merit, b u t the l i n g u i s t i c
c h a r ~ c t e r i s t i c sof the T i v language, which of course, revezls

much about the c u l t u r e and s o c i a l , p o l i t i c a l as w e l l as

historical background of a people shows t h a t the Tiv people belong

t o t h e Bmtu group. And, in f a c t , as Gbor (1985:l~-12) r i s h t l y

p u t s i t , all t h e Bantu people once s e t t l e d i n one area* Henceo

Greenberg (1949) and (1963) classifies t h e Tiv I a ~ u a g eac
' B a t o i d v , a sub-group of the Benue-Congo l a n g u e ~ c s ,

ks with any o t h e r e t h n i c groups in Africg, +be Qi"Ggle

~ i g r a t e dts/from various parts of Africa befare they fFfisil:$

sGtt3ed in t h e i r p r e s e n t a e a s . Gbor (1978:13) be%i&?es+?la?

ik!-4e some o f t h e Tiv people migrated t o South Mrien, o t h e r 8 di.ni;

23 E a s t and W e ~ Africa,
t in s e a r c h of S e r t i l o farr;San&
-.
Rubingn (1969:63) ssys t h s t when the Tivr came i n t e E o c t W t

GAth the F u l a n i s , Jukuns, and the Chanbas they could not settbe

=ong them, and so decided t o f u r t h e r micra?Z $5 &en! 6nc! Sinda.

ldssr Gbor (1978:18) goes on to oxplain f u r t h e r t?+5tthe Tive

 18
Gbor's view really throws some light an the geneaolocy of Tiv

as w e l l as the d i a l e c t a l variations that occnr i n the language

which are discusaed below.

2.3 DIALECTAL VP.RIhfIOICS IN TTV

b y Tiv s p o a k e r ~are oi t h e opinion t h a t there are no

d i a l e c t s i n Tiv. Such views are probably due t o what Umenger

(1981) terms as lack of profomadknowledge of l b g u i c t i c s and

dialectology i n particular.

Generally, every speech t o m u n i t y is chara~terisedby

v a r i a t i o n s i n speech, either at ihc individual level ( i d e o l e c t s )
or group l e v e l (dialect), s i n c e no two s p e d e r s spc& a l i k e ,

b n d , as D i t t m r 1(1976:.145) c l e a r i y p o i n t s out that whet

"the dialect a t l a s e s marked are mostly ~ o u a ds h i f t s ,
but they also sometimes include grammatical

Such differences may thus manifest i n d i f f e r e n t regions

( r e g i o 3 a l d i a l e c t s ) or i n different s o c i d group6 (socSal d i a l e c t s ) .

In Tiv: d i a l e c t a l variations mainly manifent themaelves at

s e p w a t b g one speech community from the other.

The Benue River, f o r i n s t m c e , s g a r a t e s the Iharev peo3le

from t h e i r Kparov counterparts. Vact unsettled f a n meas on

the other hand further fr=ment speakers of the l a t t e r ~ a - i e t y

i n t o d i s t h c t sub-dLclects, and 60 on.
In t h e followhg ~ectionsa b r i e f u n a l y o j t ~oi" these 1
v a r i a t i o n s at t h e lavcls o f phonology, morphology and syntax

is made in order t o demnstrate t h e existence of d i c t i n c t dialects,

 Paorg t h e v a r i o u s d i a l e c t s i d e n t i f i e d in Tiv a r e Iharev,

Ukun, b s e v and Ksarev. But f o r t h e p i r p o s e of o u r d i ~ c u s s i o n

h e r e , we w i l l o n l y t r y t o coclpare t h e I h a r e v and Kparev d i a l e c t s

as these appear t o be most d i f f e r e n t i a t e d because of their

s e p a r a t i o n b y a major p h y s i c a l b a r r i e r - tBc X v c r 3enu.e.

Moreover, they a r e mythical descendants of ' Ichongo' and 'Xpusu'

r e s p e c t i v e l y , t h a t is, T i v l s two sons,

As t a b l e 1 below confirms, i t i s a t t h e l e v e l of

p r o n u i ~ c i a t i o no r t h e r e a l i s a t i o n of individual phonemes - that

t h e d i a l e c t s of a language tend i o d i f f e r most widely. But,

incidentally, t h e d i f f e r e n c e s between t h e I h a r e v and Kparev

dialects appear t o be random, ranging over a small s e t of

i n d i v i d u d lexica'l, ftems as l i s t e d below, Them differences do

n o t appear t o l e n d themselves to g e n e r a l r u l e s .

Ihnrev E n h G o Variants

1, ale alu

2, hile hide r e turn

3. kerata kereatq inside

 Iharev 5arev E n c l i s h Gloss Variants

kile tile hold 02

me dee me zee
deq ime z e 3

The point being nade i s t h a t t h e variations indicated above

such a s /a:o/, /k:.t/ a r e unsystematic and l i m i t e d , It is proba3ly

because of this l i m i t e d n e s s of occurrence t h a t many apeakers

believe that there a r e no d i a l e c t d i f f e r e n c e s in t h e language.

There a r e a l s o i n t e r e s t i n g t o n a l d i f f e r e n c e s between t h e
*
two dialects. Consider t h e following data:

TABLE 2
Iharev Kparev English Gloss
--*-

A \ \ / //
7. avave a va vee h a s he/she cone?

8, wem
/ .' we' n6-0' is i t me?

70.
\
6 ya ve
\ ' fl
u ya vee
/ N
Have you eaten?

11. kw&hhy& kAghy& n& is t h e r e any food availabi.a?

n& j\e j6
'
4
12.
J
3
\
ya ga
\ 0 /
u ya gaa
/.' w o x ' t you e a t ?

In t h e Iharev dialect t h e f L n d word i n an interrogative

Con-c;truction ends i n a low t o m ( i , e , where the word i s monosyllabic
i
and ehds in a vowsl), In e q u i v a l e n t c o n s t r u c t i o n s i n Kpn*e?, the

V o w e l i s doubled [or lengthened) and the tone r a i s e s t o hi&;

 21

2-15,? LEXICAL VARIATION

A s may be expected there :.ye n n u ~ b e rol" l e x i c c l

d i f f e r e n c e s between t h e two d i a l e c t s , These d i f f e r e n c e s a r e

pervasive enough t o warrant the attention of t h e s t a n d a r d i z a t i o n

agencies. Some of t h e s e differences are l i s t e d in Table 3 b e l o w ,

TABLE 3
Iharev -Kparev English Gloss

14. Kdar Gambe bed

15. lcyehen ahwar spoor

76. tsum ate r e s t house

:7, abu tube hut (for yam storage)

18, gbar Ikyar bii hoe

79, gbenge wua guinea corn

20, saaraki i c h e ~ h e ru dam melon (one of t h e v a r i e t i e s o f ) .

2-3.3 SYNTACTIC VARIATION

Although d i f f e r e n c e s at this level are q u i t e minimal -

t h i s i s hardly s u r p r i s i n s - the l i t t l e there l s d e m r v e s

attention. For a number of c o n s t r u c t i o n s (for example, t h e

im2erative n e g a t i v e ) t h e Kparev d i a l e c t e x h i b i t s a more e l a b o r a t e

and e x p l i c i t syntax then the Iharev. Examples:

Xparev : De k e r a zzan GO i y o l ga

Stop n o t d i s t u r b ne body n o t ,

Do not d i s t u r b m e ,
Iharev: De zaaner~ iyd ga

Stop disturb+me body not

b o not d i s t u r b m e . tt
- -
 22

It Eay be noticed that i n the Iharev sentence the

possessive noun "ao" and the negative marker %erav' of Xparftv

are ificorporated i n t o the verb %aaEtgt o y i e l d "zaanem. ''

The complex and e l a b o r a t e d nature of Kpsrev syatax appears

t o Le one reason f o r its high p r e s t i g e rating in r e l a t i o n t o

other T i v dialects. There i s even the suggestion t h s t K2arev

may be considered a High vsrbety tmd o t h e r d i a l e c t s , Low

varietie~ a d i & o s s i c sense. However, t h i s pos$tion i s

debatable and can n o t be seriously maintained. Nopethelecc,

Kpmev appears t o be more s u i t e d for a forza3. and l i t e r a r y s t y l e

thm I h z e v f o r exam-ple. This, a l o n ~w i t h qther b b t @ r i c € d

r e a s o n s , as we & a l l see a a k e ~tbe d i a l e c t the uncontrover~kd

b a s i s f o r a T i v l i t e r a r y standard,

2.4 EARLY ATTEMPTS Or'; THE STUiIY OF TIV AND TIV &S

Most o f the earlier scholars, ~ u c has Malherba Arnofit,

of t h i s langmge were expatriate x x i s a i o n a r i c ~ , who based t b G 2

writings on their percc?'c5on of the speecb of t h e i r Tiv

Inforuants. The a n a l y s e s achieved varying degrees o f StfLiccsr:

as ?le s h a l l show below.

Althaugh attenpts have been made by soze f e w T i l i i a k L Y C -

spedcers in recent years t o publish works on Tiv, not 2QGi

hae been done w i t h regards to serious and sastained h g u i s t i c

a n a l y s i ~ . Xn fact, most of what has been p u b l i s h e d is as

e x p l a h e d by Gundu i1985:1), scattered and are nost oftcti o b w u r e

too. hs r o a t researchers on t h i s language have been expat.riate

missionaries/scholars, the majority of t h e i r p b l i c a t i o d a a r c
 23
o f t e n -haccessible, stored aw.ly i n far-away l i b r a r i e s such as
that o f the School. f o r Oriental and African Studies.

Far g u r p s e s o f we w i l l d i v f d e early e f f o r t s at
the development of a Tiv standard into two c a t e g o r i e s of LansQge

Plariing Agencies (GAS). That i s , those undertaken by

i n d i v i d u s l s , usually on their own i n i t i a t i v e , and those carri8d

o u t by groups usuallg w i t h o f f i c i a l . backins.

2.4.1 LBNGUAGE PLANNING AGENCIES

2, ,
I P!DIVIDUGI; AGENTS
. .
The first works publishecl on the T i v bnguage only e 3 ~ e a r e d

k Xilbaa's vocabulary Ilst o? 1828 under the popis 'Af3a: which

-.
sorue people w r o r ~ l yrefer t o ~s T i v i s c e r t n j n l y inceF?a@x*
But as he further r e v e a l s , the
"firat f i v e worCs on T i v appeared i n Clark's
collection af African words i n d i f f e r e n t languages
published i n 1848, l* ( p a x i i i )

Though Clark's work did not bring about nuch impact on t k c

k q u a g e , i t probably, marked the beginning o f the rcW&;nit%%

sf She Tiv language as deserving of scholarly a t t e n t h i

In 1854, Rev. Sigismund Koelle, a Germaa missionary 2 n c h d e ~

t h 2 ? i v language amons the 715 languages that made u:b BAD boais,

w a s referred t o as 'tlliwi". Be was not a native spesker ni-?d ac

&lx!ih says, he anly arrived at these wards by u s i n g h a c 3 s l a v e s 1

abrhing i
z Freetown as informants.
 Another e f f o r t made on the study o f Tiv l n n p a ~ ewas due
to Reverend Samuel Crowther as he Wac then and was published

1855. In t h i s work he included a collection of some Tiv words.

W e a l s o learn fro= Gunclu that i n the sane year TJ. Hutchinson

included sone iaformation on Tiv i n h i s p u b l i c a t i o n s of I855 sr,a

7858.

\ k i t i n g about the Tiv language i n 1924, Leo Frobenius s a p s ,

"Their language was quite p e c u l i a r and d i d not

resenble any of the surrounding d i a l e c t s . "
A l l the sane, he was able to provide a short T i v vocabulard h 3 t

The translation o f the B i b l e i n t o Tiv may &so be viewed

e
Me promoting the development of the language. One of ~ u c he e r h

a t t e n p t s kkq nade by A.S. Judd, who as Gundu (7985) explains,

" t r a n s l a t e d scripture s e c t i o n s and published a p
-
with the Niger Press at Shonga." However, t h i a

?'316[17, the same t h e St Mark was published. SubsequeriB

t r e n d a t i o n s of the Bible into Tiv were: 1920 St Matthew, 7~2!:

- e

8% J o ~ and
, the Acts of Apoatles i n 1937. The complete
W r i 2 S ~ hof the R i b l e , however, came out only in 1964. ?he95

wefe @ u b l i s h e d by the missionariesr

All these attempts not wfthstanding, one can only x g r 5 6

Armstrong (1979>, that fro^ the l i n g u i c t i c point of VieY,

"ehs first s e r i o u s etudy of Tiv w a s by t h e Reverer~dW Y ~ . %.&herbet'

-
(9.3). Malherbevs Tiv-Englifih Dictlonorx which was p u b l ' i ~ C ~ ;ir
I
1
1331, r e d l y set the pattern for the Tiv orthography:
In thia dictionary, Malherbe was a b l e t6 i d e n 5 2 y ~bou*

30 Fai;.4le and consonants whose phonetic values are net SVQYE

d
*
 25

Malherbe's was a praiseworthy attempt t o provicie a Tiv

orthography, b u t his work contained c e r t a i n problematic claims

(such as t h e use of gh and v ) which have been c o n t r o v e r s i a l

i n t h e w r i t j n c of Yiv [see next chapter).

The study of Tiv received a b i g boost in 1940 when
Capt. ( ~ r )R.C. Abraham's four publications on T i v language

appeared. Today, Abraham's A Dictionary of T i v and The

P r i n c- i g l e ~of Tiv are believed t o have l a i d the fouadation for

uoderp Tiv studies, Armstrong (19791, f o r i n a t ance, con.sider,9

these books as a tremendous achievement that aw--n r r l ~ i i ----

A b r ----
aham a
, -,.-
D. L i t t , degree a t t h e University of Oxford.
0

krnstrong, however, dieagreee with Abraham's metho2 0"

w r i t b g tones, i c e . by placing the d i a c r i t i c marks under t h e

relevant l e t t e r s , He z l s o rejected A b r a h a 9 s postulation C? 4

'mid-tonem for Tiv, p r e f e r r i n g t o c a l l it a d ~ w s k F 2

( f u r t h e r dicsz~sionin t h e next chapter).

Finally, and i n more recent times, two e x p a t r i a t e woPkrs

Oh the Tiv languacc arc worthg of mention. The first
-
is

G*sfefisor Carl Boffmann whose l e c t u r e s on Tiv i n t h e DepG*"uMifi

a f L i n g u i s t i c s a t ISadan startfng from 1973 e x c i t e d the % E W c s +

n a t i v e Tiv s c h o l a r s and encouraged t h e publication of ab

over-growing amount of work i n t h e language. The s e c e ~ 8i e the

late Prof cssor Armstrong, who was t h e guiding s p i r i t kit2 h5-nd

r e c e n t official i n t e r e s t and governmental i n t e r v e n t i o n in t h h f

aWelopnent of t h e language, of which more is s a i d ~ ~ L Q W ,
2.4.2 GROUP (OFFICIAL) AGENTS

SO far, 0 f f 5 d . d interest i n the development of t h e T i v

language was f i r s t recorded Js 1979. The then c i v i l i a n Govoraor

of Benue S t a t e , Mr Aper Aku, formed a 12-man Ad-hoc C o x n i t t e e

headed b y 3r Orban Nyiakura. The c o d t i t e e was charged w i t h

the r e s p o n s i b i l i t y of p r e p a r i n g a d e f i n i t f v e T i v orthography.

The c o r n i t t e e which submitted i t s f i n d i n g s I n t h e form. of e.

Report in 1980 operated i n the f o l l o w i n g manner;

-
(a) Aims:

This cornittee was t o examine, first and foremost, t h e

tentative orthography of Tiv language which P r o f e s s o r Arrn~trong.

D

had subnittad t u the Federal. M i n i s t r y o f Education, Nationid.

Language Centre. Then i t would clarify a l l problems 03 the Tiv

orthosrs.a&, and c o r r e c t e r r o n e o u s ideas on Tiv language, as
e q l a i n e d by t h e S e c r e t a r y of the C o d t t e e ih an ~ n ~ e r v i ~ ~

~ L t hthe writer in Makurdi recently.

(b) Conduct o f Business:

A -
The committee employed an tlopen-approach'l method wPWft%y
h p u t from t h e g e n e r a l p u b l i c was encouraged and welcone3.

Knowlezgeable and e n t h u s i a s t i c i n d i v i d u a l s were interVW?:e:l

individually and sometimes i n open d i a l o g u e , condv.5kS dDPGugh

the media ( p a r t i c u l a r ~ yTelevision and Radio). Th3 e%&Lftoe

&so r e c e i v e d t h e works of e a r l i e r writers such BS t k a a e ~ a i t i o n e d

Some of t h e d e c i s i o n s a r r i v e d a t by t h e cornmkt%% ( m ~ eOf

WWt5fi w i l l be furt'ner examined i n the next chapte?) are as f9Xlows:

 27
(i) The cornnittee accepted P r o f e s s o r Armstrong's h i s t o r i c a l notes

a d views on Tiv with c e r t a h except5uns.

(ii) The committee disagreed t:ith t h e view that t h e r e a r e no

diphthongs iii 9iv and suggested plausible reasons f o r t h i s clain*

(iii) To t h e Ad-hoc committee, t h e idea t h a t t h e r e is no 'r' in

Tiv as proposed by Armstrong was uracceptzble. I n t h e i r view, 'P'

and '1' a r e di~tinctivcb u t only interchangeable,

- -
(iv) The v l e w t h a t t h e Tiv language does n o t p o s s e s s l o n g vowels

was equally discarded, The committee provided evidence to

demonstrate that Tiv language d i s t i n p i c h e c between long ~ 2 . dphcrt

vowels. @

( v ) The cornlittee resolved t h a t 'the writing i n Tiv should EOilrirn

w i t h ~ r o n u n c i a t i o nas t h i s , they b e l i e v e d , would sake t h e @as$

of t h e oral and written f o r n s of the language easy.

( v i ) A f t e r a heated debate OL t h e s t a t u s of Gone 6 o n t w V ~ s s h ~

Tiv graphemes such as ( c b , $z>, dky., a d ;q-y t h e cdLLi.~*fe

tentatively f i x e d t h e number of Tiv graphemes at 65, ta1d.a~i n t o

cons id era tic^ t h e p o s s i b i l i t y o f d i s c o v e r i n g more as "*S5 p 4 5 on.

2.5 PRESENT STATE QF gFEAIRS

Currently, t h e r e has n o t been any evidence of: ftirtkw

, o f f i c i a l interest i n T i v s t u d i e s . Neither ha6 t h r C been atq

a ther group intcrest i n this directFon. Some i n d i v i d ~ 8 1st%Cc?fits

r3f higher learning who t r y t o work on t h e language 3iily PaLthfully

reproduce tne recomn;endations p r o v i d e d by the Ad-hoc 6oniflr5c-tea

aad make no e f f o r t at innovation. The 1980 report ofi P ~ TP ~ v

language by the Ad-hoc c o r m i t t e e seexs t o be the 5F1f tiitcharity

 28
now t h z t c o u l d b e employed by institutions, the media, and

language c e n t r e s . Hoxever, it is hoped t h a t as more l i n g u i s t s

emerge among the Tiv, the scope and quality of work in t h e

l a n ~ w u ~w ei l l improve. Although a good num2cr of icdigenous

scholars have shown interest in writing on the language, they

m e hmpere2 by general indifference and lack of fun&&.

 CHAPTER THREE

LINGUISTIC ISSUES IN THE STRN3ARDIZXTION OF TIV

- .
3 00 INTXGDUCTION

So f a r there hss not teen any final acceptable standard

o z t h o g r a p h : ~of Tiv, as is the cace w i t h soae o t h e r Nigerian

languages such as Kanuri and Hausa.

I n t h e 7980 s u b n l t t e 6 by t h e Ad-h6c committee on the

Tiv language, i t was p o i n t e d o u t t h a t t h i s committee accepted

o n l y a p a r t of t h e orthography proposed by Profesfior:Amstrong

because t h e mexbers b e l i e v e d t h a t Armstrong was

" d e f i c i e n t i n his view of Tj.v vowels and consonants

and t h e total number they s t a n d at."

Bowever, the committee was c a u t i o u s on f i x i n g t h e number of

phonemee i n T i v since they felt t h a t more and more could be

i d e n t i f j - e d w i t h time. After all d a l t b e r a t i o n s , t h e co:mi.i;t;ee

wrote down what they believed should be p r e s e n t l y accepted i n

T i v orthography. b%at came out as t h e committe

w a s actually based on whst e a r l i e r researchers naa proposeu with

c e r t a i n modific=:ions. A s we have already noted, t h e Tiv

orthography proposed by the Ad-hoc c o ~ z d t t e enow s e r v e s ns a

frame of r e f e r e n c e f o r r e s e a r c h work and w r i t i n g on'the l a n o a g e .

I n t h e following s e c t i o n s , we will examine t h e c o r m i t t e e ' s

decisions o r p r o p o s a l s on the orthography as they r e l a t e t o
t h e a l p h a b e t , s p e l l i n g rules a n d tone. 1

3.1 THE TIV ALF'EiSBET i

There has been a great deal of controversy surrouxd:lng t h e

graphic r e p r e s e n t a t i o n of T i v vowel and consonant sounds.

So f a r t h r e e major a l p h a b e t i c s y s t e m have been proposed f o r

Tiv - Malherbels, Armstrong's and t h e t of the Ad-CGC committee

( s e e Appendix A ) , The ~ a i nareas of controversy relate t o t h e

r e p r e s e n t a t i o n of vowels and certain consonantal distinctions

xhose phonemic status ia problematic.

Palherbe postulated the e x i s t e n c e o r thc diphthong /ou/

Tiv. Armstrong in denying t h i s asserted, most confidentlzr,

that "there was no diphthongs i n Tiv." T h i s p o s i t i o n was

generally accepted, especially by non-native i on the

language (cf. Jockers 119851) but received 'a 1 L but fair

treatment i n the Ad-hoc c o ~ : s i t t e e ' s r e p o r t . 1

The committee argue6 that four diphthongs may be identified

in Tiv, v i z :

-
ou as i n maugh %tandB1, -
nou " c o t t o n w

as in wua "guinea corn/killw

-
ue as i n "ten" -
due "go out"

-
vue 'trotten"

It i s likely thst sone more diphthongs e x i s t . Antsa (19891

refers to & -
as i n ei %oU a d kei - wsurprj.sel't and & as in
-
a1 %rsV1and
- -
-
sat a personal name,

He f u r t h e r suggests that Tiv diphthongs may be classified b t o

closing, c e n t e r i n g and falling. 2

t
(b) Long Vowels:

Armstrong (1979) again a s s e r t s that t h e r e are no l o n g

consonants i n Tiv and no d i s t i n c t i o n of long Vs s h o r t , or

f o r t i s v s l e n i s consonants .., long vowels are shown e i t h e r

by d o u b l i n g the e f f e c t of a f i n a l (i)."

In opposing Armstrong's p o r i t i o n , tbc Ad-hoc committee

attercpted t o de~onstratethe phonesic status of vowel lcngthening

in t h e language and t h e need t o r e p r e m a t t h i s o r t h o g r a p h i c a l l y

as shown in Table 5 beJow:

S h o r t Vowels L o n ~Vowels -
a as i n llcharcoaltl aa a s i n akaa Itto tell"

u a s in ku - "death" uu as i n & 'Pu~h'*

i as fn iti "namew ii as i n a t i ? Mdove1'

e as i n ate '%but1' ee ac in b e e "fbish"

The c o r n i t t e e ' s p o s i t i o n i s t h a t "since t h e e l o n g a t i o n of

t h e vowel cun change t h e meaning of t h e vowel, then t h e e l o n g a t i o n

de,.jerves t o bc treated a o a d i s t i n c t i v c p j long vowelt'*

S t r a n g e l y enough, though, the comaittee does not i n c l u d e ~ a e 7

and (cur in t h e i r alphabet, T h i s is p r o b ~ b l yan o v e r s i g h t that

should be amended.

( c ) Thc 'Open' - 0:

T i v phonology r e c o g n i s e s t h e e x i s t e n c e of sn open /,/ a d

1
a h f g h e r /O/, TraZitional1:-, t h e open /)/ i c distingui.shcd
h
from i t 6 higher counterpart by t h e use of t h e circumflex COT.

S m s t r o n g suggested t h a t t h e u s e of t h e subscript d o t ,
i.c. t o > , wzs more i n c o n f o r n i t y wi'uh what o b t c r i c s i r o
~ ther

African languages. After several meetings of t h e Ad-hoc c o r m i t t e e ,

radfo d i s o u a s i o n e and public c o n t r i b u t i o n s i t was decided t h a t

h c t r o n g ' s recommendatioa be adopted. However, the recotrimendation

i s y e t t o be widely accepted ( s e e next c h a p t e r ) .

3.1. 2 CONSONAXTS
The L/X distinction:

This c o n s t i t u t e s one of t h e n o s t i n t e r e s t i q c r e a s of

disxqreement i n t h e a a l y c i s a d writing of Tiv. Malherbe

distinguished t h r e e v a r i e t i e a ~f but asserted

d l interchangeable with 1. - This was most conft

reaction Armstrong proposed that o n l y & w a s far

Tiv speech and that should be t r e a t e d as a val

his alphabet 2 fs, t h e r e f o r e , h d i c n t e d as optic
no r u l e s were provided f o r its Usem

-
The Ad-hoc c o m i t t c c l i s t 1 and r as separi -
t h e f r alphabet. Their c l n h 5s t h a t both sound:

in sgeech. However, from t h e i r d i s c u s s i o n i t a]

h a s a d i s t i n c t pronunciation i n t e r v o c a l i c a l l y a1

t h e preceding and f o l l o w i n g vowels are i d e n t i c d

It would then appear t h a t Arnstrong was co:

suggesting t h a t only & has phonemic s t a t u s and

vnr i a n t ,

The controversy over & -

and r u n d e r l i n e s th

t h e demands of a phonenic orthography and a p h o n e t i c one t h a t

seems t o bedevil Tiv s t a n d a r d i z a t i o n . While a n a l y s t s like

k n s t r o n g tended towards a s t r i c t l y phonemic orthography, t h e

Ad-hoc cotunittee appears t o f a v o u r , probably without r e a l i s i n g

it, a mixture of t h e two.

SPELLING RULE5
I n t e r e s t i n g l y , s p e l l h z problems i~Tiv have less t o do

with word d i v i s i o n (whf c h s o f a r a p p e a r s t o be u n c o n t r o v e r s i a l ) ,

b u t w i t h t h e w r i t h g of certain c ~ n s o n ~ t s .

A s may be seen in the d p h a b e t s reproduced in A~pezidixA,

t h e r e i s a s u b s t a n t i d . number of consonant clu: t the

0

lznp&ge, For some obscure reason though the snolaitig of :qozJs

-
such ss dzwa %outhl' h a s attracted a t t e n t i o n .
consensus of t h e Ad-hoc c o r n i t t e e i s t h a t t h e +a unnecussary

since both p r o n u n c i a t i o n s i,e, dxwc and xwa a r e aecepta5le*

The decision is i n opposition t o those who woult

Tip t o retain i t s d f s t i n c t i v e spelling in l i n e wacc o t n e r
Bantu languages, -

, - ..
In T i v writins, t h e r e has been i n c o n s i s t e n c y in tho
. *

s p e l l i n g of words such as:

igio ,
itieu , ityeu 'If am"

d i e l e g h , dyelegh %&edw

The Ad-hoc cam:nittee propa~eda r u l e tha-1; L shov36 se

-
w r i t t e n a f t e r h and &, and i n a l l other cases. Tht' b a s i s f o r

this recommendation i s unclear, It would have nade m o m sentx

 if were written before high front vowels such as or even t?,

and i i s used i n other environments.

( c ) ch/c

The same lack of l i n g u i s t i c saphistlcation underlies the

Ad-hoc c o r m i t t e e l s recommendztion that 5 be preferred t o & in

representing the a l v e o p a l a t d . affricate /t
J/ i n words like

chicha "allw,chia 'bfraidtl etc. which would the] iten as

-
cica and 2. No reason is provided. One may spcuraw that

-
the reason was that ~ i n c eno ch combination is found in the
E n g l i s h alphabet, it should not be included in T i v , 3
m

3.3 T O N E - ~ ~ I ~ ~ G

It is significant that the Ad-hoc c o r n i t t e e resolved to

l e a v e the matter of tone-marking f o r Tiv l i n g u i s t 8 t o 6cttI.c in

future. The g e n e r d v i e w , however, i s that the language can be

read f l u e n t l y by Tiv native speakers without the use of tone-

marks.

This i s an o l d argument which enjoys much support an.ong

African l i n g u i s t s , but has been challenged effectively in

Williamxm ( 7 981 1, those who wish t o nark t o n e ; the f o u r

p o s s i b i l i t i e s t h a t have becn suggested for Igbo (cf. h + w ~ c h - ~ k ~ a

(1983) nay be considered. These arc: t o mark all tones, t o

mark o n l y law or only high tone and t o nark tone only where there

is a difference from the preceding tone. Another p o s s i b i l i t y

t
is to use tone-marking t o disambiguate potentially ambiguous
-
words such as % l l k U l * l wua '#guinea corn", "grindf1.

i.e,wua
\ fi
- kill
0
wua - guinez corn

-.
m a - grind
- -
 35
3.4 P r o b a b l y b e c c u ~ eof t h e apparent g e n e r d agrec~ent

on t h e d i a l e c t basis of ~ t a n d a r dTiv, there a r e few l i n ~ w i s t 5 . c

problem a r e a s as compared w i t h s a y , Igbo. It i s p o s s i b l e

though that w i t h f u r t h e r a d more sustained l i t e r q r y activity

in t h e languages more p r o b l e m w i l l conie t o l i g h t which would

Phcn be tackled by t h e e x i s t i n g standardizatioq agency.
 36
KOTES TO CIYA??'EB T H E 2 3

1. H. Jockers, ( 1 9 8 5 ) "The Tiv verbal groupt1,

2. More examples e x i r t other thm those noted in t h i s

chapter which clearly shows t h a t there are diphthongs

Ln T i v .

3, But African languages are n o t e d for t h e high nanber of

digraphs even) anong accepted orthographies.

 CHt.?TER FOUR

T I V LANGUAGE STC.NDAl?D1Z.4I1IODJ: THE sOCIOCULTURU DIMENSION

4. I THE STATUS OF TIV

4.101 THE N A T I O Y U LEVEL
=though aE we have seen in e3agters two and t h r e e
a v a i l a b l e s t a t i s t i c s on T i v are quite l i m i t e d , t h o language

has, a l l t h e sane, r e c e i v e d o i f i ~ i z J -r e c o g n i t i o n a t t h e

n a t i o n a l Level,

In b r o a d c ? . s t i n ~ , Tiv i s m e of the n i n e N i g s r i m 1nne;uagco

that f e a t u r e on Radio Nigeria news d a i l y . T i v 18 &so om
*
of t h e n i n e Nigerian languzges i n which t h e Federal )!inistry

of Education c o n p i l e d an o f f i c i a l standardized glossary of

technical and s c i e n t i f i c t e r m i n o l o g i e s f o r t h e p r l ~ r w yschool
curriculum I n 1979, O t h e r s are Xdo, E f i k , f i l f u l d e , Bausa,

Igbo, Ijaw, Kanuri and Yoruba. 1

However, theugh a maJor lznguage i n Benue S t a t e , with a

speaker p o p u l a t i o n s f over t h r e e a i l l i o n , T i v i s regarded as

one of t h e cinor languages at the National l e v e l , T h i s is

probably one reason why standardization p r o c e s s e s have been

r a t h e r low in t h e l a n ~ m a g e . I n other words, Tiv i s a minor

language k1kie2 compared with o t h e r Nigerian langucges l t k e Ilauoa

which i s more widely spoken within Nigeria and even beyoad,

TLv does not enjoy wide r e c o s i t i c n . l i k e Hausa even among t h e I

northern s t a t e s of N i g e r i a a s naj. b e evidenced in such donaim

as trade, rol,ifiw aad e d u c z t i o r .
(a> Trade:
U n t i l r e c e n t l y , Hausa w a s t h e o n l y language c o m o n i y used

in Benue S t a t e f o r comxunication t h a t involved t r a d e r s from

d i f f e r e n t language speaking a r e a s , p a r t i c u l a r l y t h o s e from t h e

n o r t h e r n p a r t o f t h e country, T h i s w a s , however, partly because

most t r a d e r s t h a t trooped i n t o Benue S t a t e t o buy and s e l l canie

from t h e f a r North, and s2oke Hausa as e i t h e r t h e i p f i r s t o r

s e c o ~ r dlanguage. Even t h e few t r a d e r s t h a t came froin soutLer&

Nigeria b e l i e v e d t h a t a l l N o r t t z r n e r s were Hausas and thus felt

t h e only language f o r e a s y com;llmication would be Hausa. Thls

*
notion w a s n o t however c o r r e c t a s . n o s t Benue indigenes do not
u n d s r s t a n d o r speak even a s i i l g l e word in Hausa.

N e v e r t h e l e s s , any farmer in Benue S t a t e who w e ~ tI n t o the

y e ~ r l yp r o d u c t i o n of c e r e a l s l i k e groundnuts, beniseed, corn

m i l l e t and r i c e , which c o n s t i t u t e d t h e major e x p o r t c r o p s of t h e

time, s t r o v e t o s p a k one o r two words in Hausa.

The s i t u a t i o n i s now changing g r a d u a l l y as t r a d e r s from o t h e r

a r e a s no l o n g e r comaunicate w i t h farracrs o n l y i n ki\rsa, b u t a l s o

make use of t t e l o c a l l a n g u a & e s and/or Pidgin. That i s , t r a d e r s

who f i n d themselves i n t h e Idoma-speaking a r e a s of Benue S t a t e

u s e Idorca ad/or P i d g i n f o r cornm~nication, l i k e w i s e t h o s e t h a t

go t o t h e Tiv-speaking areas. T h i s shows t h e awaroaess now

c r e a t e 2 in t h e v z r i o u s l a n g u a g e s where everybody s t r u g g l e s t o

h p r o v e on t h e s t a t u s of h i s o r h e r mother tongue.

With t h e Tiv people farming t h e l a r g e s t number o f c r o p s

p r o d u c e r s in t h e s t a t e t h e r e f o r e , t h e i r language i s now g a i n k g
some currency w i t h i n and o u t s i d e t h e state.
 T h i s does n o t however r a t e t h e language a major one in thc

country.

(b) Reli~ion:

A s p o i n t e d o u t i n an earlier c h a p t e r , t h e f i r s t r n i s s i S n w i 2 ~

t h a t introduced r e l i g i o u s a c t i v i t i e s i n Benue S t a t e , p a r t i c u l a r l y

wlkkin t h e Tiv-speaking a r e a s , were mainly Euro-@&g %SC CsL? &

6 2 speak t h c l o c a l languzgc, e x c e p t English. The u m e ~ - ' % 9 f o r

? h L i g l o u s p u r p o s e s had t h e r e f o r e been q u i t e limitccj. P??!:: I ; % u ~ ' c h e ~ .

-.
aveu with t h e v a r i o u s Bible t r a n s l a t i o n s i n t o Tiv, ZE

pg+A+=+ &scussed i n c h a p t e r two, i t i s o n l y t h e R o ~ c A % ? & f l i c

#

G h r c h , and a branch of t h e Sudan. United Mission, ?a$ula.*';g

:~rown as NKST (Nongo u K r i s t u u Sudan hen ~ i v )t h a t g i v e s wlde

. .
s o g n i s a n c e t o t h e Tiv languagc in t h e i r r e l i g i o u e g$tFvi9"%eaa

The Moslem, on t h e i r p a ~ t ,c a r r y o ~ t th e i r gr~~ch+zg

e x c l u s i v e l y i n Bausa. Versions o f t h e K o r ~are porrnalLy

t r a n s l a t e d from Arabic i n t o Hzusa f o r t h e l i s t e n e r t o folEw'f,

L i t t L e o r no e f f o 2 t i s being made t o r e p l a c e Hausa w i t h T i V 6 2

t h e o t h e r Benue S t a t e i n d i g e n e o u s languzges, even though n ~ t

a l l Moslems r c s i d e n t i n t h e s t a t e b e l o c g t o t h e Hausa e t h n i e

group.

(c) Educatioz

Tiv i c n o t t a u g h t in s c h o o l s o u t s i d e Benue S t a t e , as t h e

major l a n g u a g e s like Igbo and Hmsa.

Yoruba, f o r i r s t a c e , i s t a x g h t in a l l t h e s c h o o l s in t h e

w e s t e r n p a r t of N i g e r i a , while Hausa is t a u g h t in &I the

Northern S t a t e s . These t h r e e Nigerian l a n g u a g e s a r e a l s o

 r e c o g n i z e d by t h e West A f r i c a n Examination Body and sre among

t h e s u b j e c t s o f f e r e d at t h e GCE l e v e l . Tiv i s o n l y t a u g h t in
s c h o o l s t h a t f a l l w i t h i n t h e Tiv-speaking a r e a s , a s e x p l a i n e d

l a t e r in t h i s c h a p t e r . And u n l i k e t h e s e major Kigerian l a n g u a g e s ,

have been one o f t h e f a c t o r s a f f e c t i n g t h e s p r e a d o f Tiv s t u d i e s .

+3 7.2 T m STATE LEVEL

T i v i s a member of t h e Benue " L i n g u i s t i c t r i a n g l e t t v i e ;

Tdoca, T g a a and Tiv. There a r e o t h e r languages $4 t h e s t a t e

._:
w n x h tbough widely spoken do n o t r e c e i v e t h e high status
I

accorded t b o s e that rmke up t h e s'o-called "triai;lelt. These hre

Ir

E t u l o , Igede, Bassa Komu and Bassa Nge.

S i g n i f i c a n t l y , t h e c r e a t i o n of Benue S t a t e enhanced tho

importance of Tiv, hcnce t h e r e c o p i t i o n of t h e need f o r enhanced

a t t e q t s at s t a n d a r d i z a t i o n st he 7979 committee).
It i s t h e r e f o r e n e c e s c a r y , a t t h i s p o i n t , t o e x m i n e three

domains t h a t a r e i m p o r t a n t f o r l a n p c l z ~ f ls t a n d a r d i z a t i o n . These

a r e e d u c a t i o n a l , b r o a d c a s t k g and publishixig.

4.7.2.7
.. . EDUCGTIOX
Tiv i s spoken predaminently i n t h e Tiv-speaking a r e a s of

Benue S t a t e , and I n some p a r t s of t h e neighbouring s t a t e s l i k e

Gongola and P l a t e a u .

. I n a l l t h e Fiv-speakizg a r e a s o f Benue S t a t e , t h e T i v

language i s eaiployed a s a Language of i n s t r u c t i o n i n ' t h e f i r s t

t h r e e y e a r s of t h e primary s c h o o l system, i r r e s p e c t i v e of t h e

a r e a i n which such s c h o o l s a r e l o c a t e d - Urban o r Rural.

 Ilur5.n~ t h e l a s t three years of primary e d u c a t f o n T i v i s
tuuzht a tiubjuct or o t u d y , w h i l e Erigl.i.ul~ i u then u ~ c l lfor

instruct~on .
At t h e secondary school l e v e l , the c h l i d learns Tiv as
one of the s u b j e c t s o n l y in t h e junior c1aer;es. This i s , howcver,
q p l l c u 5 1 e t o o n l y the post-primary s c h o o l s l o c a t e 2 within t h e

Tiv-speaking areas of Benue S t a t e .

T i v , a s a subjcci; of s t u 3 y has c o t r e c e i v e d any WAEC

r e c o g n L t i o c , hence i t tcrainztes w i t h tke ;ufiior secondary.

So f a r , the only a t t e m p t made a t taking t h e s t u d y of T i v beyozd,

t h e post-primary lcvel is that by t h e C o l l e g e of Education,

Katdna-Ala.

With t h e e s t a b l i o h n c n t of the T l v Department" u n d e r t h e

school of Languages, t h e following course-combinations have been

introduced:

Tiv/Znglish
~ i v / ~tiory
s
~iv/French
Tiv/Governmen t
Tiv/Social Studies

'Phi& department t o o k o f f in l$jl with a t o t a . 1 of six

stuEccts. Significantly, the number r o s e to 42 in t h e 1988/89

academic s e s s i o n . A t prescr t , the de~=:,wen t has 37 studcents,

which o b v i o u s l y shows s o ~ e2 e c l i n e p r o k l ~ . b l ydue t o some oT t k e

t
s t r i k i n g problems now b e i n g f a c e d by t h e department. One of

such major problems is lack of t e a c h e ~ s . As p o i n t e d o u t by the

Dean, School o f Languages, in an i n t e r v i e w , t h e Department or'

 42

Tiv h a s n o t y e t gat f u l l - t i m e teachera. Teathers are o n l y

d r w * d ~f
~ r ~ a~ ~ , k . =c ch p h r L ~ L C I , ~ L%>4 2 t , k i ; l , L r ~ c GG: l k g c . LG ~ L v el - : ~ t u r c b

on Tiv. Accordicg t o t h e Dcm, t h i s problem IG as a r e s u l t of

t h e fact t h c t the S t a t e Government i s y e t t o permit t h e

employment of teachers f o r t h e newly e s t a b l i s h e d d e p m t x e n t .

Cornrrenting on t h e criteria used i n admit Ling s t u d e n t s i n t o

t h e Tiv D e p a r t r e n t , the Dean s a i d , 'anybolly who s p e d t s Tiv as

h i s f i r s t language o r mother tongue' a u t o m a t i c a l i y q u a l i f i e s t o

gzln ~dc;is;;inn. It was a l s o r e v e a l e d t h a t a t t h e end of t h e
t h r e e - y e a r c o u r s e , graduates are awarded t h e usual Nigerian

C e r t i f i c a t e in E d u c a t i o n (NCE), t h u s q u a l i f y h g t h e = t o t e a c h up

t o t h e j u ~ i o rsecondary.

T h i s e f f o r t by t h e Collece of E d u c a t i o : ~ Khtsina-Ala is

r e d l y commendable. A l l t h e saxe, t h e college a u t h o r i t i e s need

t o r e v i s e t h e c r i t e r i a uced f o r a d m i t t i n g s t u d e n t s i n t o t h e T i v
Depirrtmnt .
Some people may be a b l e t o speak T i v , b u t unable t o write

in Tiv. Suc3 people may have t h e problem of coping with the

s t a n d m a s s e t f o r s t u d e n t s of T i v , e s p e c i a l l y at such an advanced

lcvcl. Moreover, admission i n t o higher i n s t i t u t i o n s a t t h e

t e r t i a r y l e v e l i n mainly determined by t h e i n d i v i d u a l ' s m e r i t

as evidenced i n the p r e v i o u s eertjf5cz.tes. There i s l i t t l e

justification f o r one c a d i d a t e b e i n g o f f e r e d admission to r e a d
T i v and a n o t h e r d e n i e d t h e a?pcrtunilg f o r no c l e a r r e a s o n . t

T h i s has posed zomc serious p:'obI.ens f o r t h e a u t h o r i t i e s concerncd,

 S f f o r t should t h e r e f o r e b e rialo t o r e g i s t e r T i v as a

s u b j e c t a t t h e GCE l e v e l , s i n c e t h i s would even e n c o u r a g e the

use o f one acceptable v a r i e t y of T i v , t h e r e b y making s t a ~ d a r d i z a -

t i o n processes easier t o accomplish.

I n f ~ c t ,t h i s f a i l u r e t o o f f e r t h e Tiv l a n g u a g e l i k e o t l x r
languages such as Hausa, I g b o , m d YoruSa a t t h e GCE l e v e l h a s

l e d t o t h e unavailability o f w r i t t e n m a t e r i a l s on 2 i v . Generally,

r e o p l e buy books t h a t a r e r e l e v a n t t o t h e i r c o u r s e of stud-3. And

t h e &ore t h e d e ~ a n 2 , t h e more e n t h u s i a s m t o p u b l i g h such boob.

Eowever, o n l y a few a u t h o r s now p u b l i s h i n T i v , so t h a t p r e s e n t l y

B

t h e r e i s a l i x i t c c ! nucaber of aatari::.ls on Tiv. sGrte of t h e

textbooks now used in t e a c h i n g t h e l a n g u ~ g eare not compreheqs$ve

in the sense that the methodology em>lo:.ed i s n o t good enough.

For i n s t s n c e , d i s c u s s i n g t h e p l u r a l i n T i v , R,C. Abrahamtg

Graxqar o f T i v s i m p l y s a y s :

( i ) I c h a r e r w o r n - o ~ t e.g. - risa
pl. A t s a v e r A r i G A worn o u t gown

( i i ) Gbasela pl. q-basela - w i l d doe;

( i i i ) Ikeve pl. akove - qqcoanut

( i v ) kuhwe pl. ikuhe - bone

The author f a i l s t o ~ i v ce x p l a n a t i o n a s t o the c h o i c e o f
the paural morpheme that is, why some t a k e t h e phownse i

others a and u whether o r n o t t h e use of such forms is

1
systematic. The authoz a l s o f a i l e d t o p r o v i d e a t e a c h e r ' s guide.

Lack of t s ~ f - n e dt e a c h e r s in Tiv a3.50 affects e t a n d a r d i z a t i o n

processes. There a r e no i n c e n t i v e s , e i t h e r from Government or

o t h e r organiznticas, t o encourEgc t h e t e a c h i n g and study of T l v ,

T h i s has probably l e d t o the p r e s e n t low status o f t h e Ti-

languege in a c r e d u c a t i o n a l set-up.

4.1.2.2 BROAXASTIMQ

T i v is one of the n i n e N i g e r i a n languages u s e d f o r neuj

t r z x s l a t i o n at t h e N a t i o n a l l e v e l . It also f e a t u r e s on some

State r a d i o p r o g r a m e s , o t h e r than Benue. I n Anambrk S t a t e ,

f o r i n s t a n c e , t h e Enugu S t a t i o n o c c a s i o n a l l y presents a r d ~ o

d i a l o g u e i n x i v as we12 as some Tiv music.

A t t h e S t a t e l e v a l , the Radio Benue news b r o a d c a s t i n T i u

c o n e s us e v e r y d a y a f t e r t h e evenin; 5 O ' c l o c k news i n E n g l i s h .

Also, a r a d i o d i a l o s u e e n t i i l e d 'Ortwer' ( ~ o c t o r )t a k e s t h e

a i r e v e r y Tuecdz.;r a t g.00a.m. This p r o p e r t a x i s p l a n n e d . t o e d u c a t e

the nasrez on t h e h p o r t a n c e o f c e r t a i n events as w e l l as d a n g e r 5

01 d r u g abuse or other social ills.

A d v c r t i s c n e n t s , especia1l.y of B e w c based proZuct-x l i k e

"Moreiv lager becr, Taraku o i l , and Benue cement are a l s o conveyed

- .

i n Tiv.

The Nigerian T e l c v L ~ iA~u ~t h o r i t y , ~Yakurdi, on t h e o t h e r

h a n d , p r o v i d e s news t r a n s l a t i o n s i n t o t h e t h r e e major Eenue

l a n g u a g e s every evening a f t e r t h e s e v e z o'cloclc news i n E n g l i s h .

The t r a n s l a t i o n in T i v comes up a t 7.40p.n. Alao, 'Irnogo', a Tiv

d i s c u s s i o n p r o g r a m e , o c c u p i e s the t r a n s m i s s i o n p e r i o d o f 6.00~.n.

- 6.30?.~. every Friday. 1

F o r all t h e s e b r o a d c a s t i n g a c t i v i t i e s , t h c Kparev dialect of

Tiv 1s used, So f a r , t h e r e havc c o t been any corn plaint^ as t o t h e

use o f t h i n d i a l e c t .
 45
4.1.2.3 PUBLISKING
Though n o t nuch has been Zorc 3.c the orca of

publishing, e i t h e r from t h e three tiers of ~ o v e r m i e n to r

otker orgcmlzictic..;c , A I ~i n c l l v i d u a l s , we cral recorfi a f e w

ad~ievemnts .
k t t h e n e t i c n a l l e v e l , t h e Federal Ministry of

Inforrimtion h s s a t r a n s l a t e d v e r s i o n O C t i i e '~Totmcrier",

which features on t h e programme ' C u r r e n t Icsuesm i n Tiv.

The v e r s i o n i s c h r i s t e n e d 'Ikpamkor'. As usual, t h e Kparev

dialect i s used f o r i t s publication. 0

In zr,atteapt t o p u b l i ~ h in
* TIT:, the Uer-lte S t a t e

M i n i s t r y of I n f o r m a t i o n h a s a l s o come o c t with o newsps~cr

p u b l i c a t i o n titled 'Angwe' whose maiden e d i t i ~ nappear26

ir- Jzcnary 1988.

O t h e r o r ~ a n i s a t i o n ssuch as 'The Tiv Youth O r g m ~ s a t i o n '

have also made tizeir awn contributions t o t h e deve:3$iti?Zt

of t h e T i v language. A p r t from p u b l i s h i n g m a t e r i a l s x i t h

Tiv background, this group h a s now come o u t w i t h a ne-d'ngapx?

gublicntinn known as ' I t y o ' which is publ5shed i n %3e

Kparcv dialect of Tiv.

I n d i v i d u e l s have also made t h e i r v a r i o u s contf 5 h t i o n a

as earlier n o t e d in e a r l y c h a p t e r s . The publis1:Gr of t h e

'Broom*, a w::kly Newspaper which t a k e s it^ base E C I ~ b

P ~ ~ 1
Benue State, h a s also r e l e a s e d p u b l i c a t i o n s i n T ~ Y .

Proaifient among t h e s e i s the 2iv Newspaper t i t l e d . 'Icharegh*

vat. This i s p u b l i s h e d by D r G.G.A. Dabo.

 Apzrt from these acwspapcss9 there arc textbook@ 4s

p o i n t e d o u t i n c h a p t e r two. 'The Tlv languzge and H i s t o r y

P r o a o t l n g C o , ~ i t t c e ' , a f t e r g o i n g through some of t h e s e

publications, c m e out w i t h t h e panphlet t i t l e d =ning

D e v e l o ~ r a---. -C
e r:~ . u r r e ~ tT i v Orthography e d i t e d by 8,G. Ik~r;.

book t o u c h e s on the e f f o r t s or
this,
F i r c t p b l i s h e d in l $ ~

, a c t i v i t i e s made ia ax z t t e ~ l l : tt o standarcX.ze Tiv o r t h o g r a p s y .

It is, one may s a y , as a resu1.t of their appeal Ilqm (1985;34j

t h a t the gavernncnt of Benue S t a t e introdvced the teacLinc; of

indfgecouc languages i n s c h o o l s on a n;orc: scriguo note,

I n sumiary, t h e r e i s ~ u c ht o b e doilc i n a%&s p h e r e s of

llf e , Education, ~ EO on, t o

b r o a d c a s t i n g , p u b l i s h i ~and

s t c n d a r d i z e t h e T i v l m g u a g e , s i n c e n o t much ha6 been c a r r l e d

o u t o c t h e s t u d y of t h e language.
 CHA2TEH FIVE

ASSESSFENT fW3 CONCLUSIOIT

i t s h o u l d b e c b v i o s ~fro= t h e f o r e g o i n g t h a t LS i n T i v

has b e e 1 f a i r l y r u d i m e n t a r y and seems, f r o m t h e p i c ; ; 3 2 view

o"pluific2 LS, t o h;ve pour;! t o a halt a l t o i ; e t l ~ 2t. Only c?

small p a r t o f t h e l z l p i z g e has beet atlciressed linguistic all.^'

( c h a p t e r T h r e e ) , a l t h o u g h i t m q - be a r g u e d t h a t t h i s constitutc~

d o z h l n s o f use ( C h a p t e r F o u r ) , althou$l saxe p r o g r e s s s e e m

t o Lave been, a m ? i s s t i l l b e i n g , ~ n d e ,t h e la-guage a p p e a r n

9

s t i l l t o have scrce way t o go. ,

All t h e sac, i t s h o u l d be i n t e r e s t i r e ; t o attercpt an

Two p u r p s e s c0uI.d be achieve& by this: an sssesnmes~~f tho

>recess i t s e l f and of t h e v a l u e o f t h e m d e i as an e v a l u ~ i h 5 t i

metric,

With regard to the p r o p e r t i e c of flexible s t z b i L 2 ~ 79,"IL

? - a t e l l e c t u a l i z a t i o n , Tiv LS appears to h m e fared paGr&vs

Q O C i f i c a t i o n i s neither appropriate n o r ideal, thou@ :here

not >$em to have evolved much beyond t h e *con~ersa*lona~~'r

e s p c i a l l y with s o l i t t l e being do23 by way of de+EZireciticii

tn here s sense],
With regard t o function and a t t i t u d e s , a m?% fdir~urable
 48
is regardel: as a yardstick f o r grammatical judgement. Al"v~oush

It performs t h e ucif;-lng and s e p a r a t i s t f u n c t i o n s t o 2 f~ir

C e g r e z , i t i s n o t clear that i t does t h e m t o any g r e a t e r e x t e n t

than the other dialects. It i s a l s o d i f f i c u l t t o d e t e r ~ i n et h e

degree of loyalty and p r i d e induced by t h e Kparcv d L i l e c t

vis-a-vis the o t h e r d i a l e c t s . This r e f e r s again t o tlbe weaknoss

of Garvin's evtiluatfcn model, already p o i n t e d out in Chapter Oae,

as n o t belng q ~ ~ t i f i a b enoush
le t o arrive a t a c l e a r d e c i s i o n .

A t thig p i n t we may refer to 2 ~ : ' c i . n ' ~m o t i v a t i o n n o c l g i ( l . c l ; s ) r

chcnge. But as we pointed o u t it i~ a moot point whether t h i d

,,

h a s l e d t o the r e c o g n i t i o n o E a d v e r s e d i v e r s i t y o r benefits

t h r o u ~ huniformation. There is no reason frorri t h e above

6escription af Tiv LS t o chmse t h i s p o s i t i o n teyor.4 ~ t a t i n ~

k i l t l t the Ad-hoc Committee d i d n o t s t r e s s u n i f o r m i t y b u t r a t h e 2

W@iasise~t h e e v o l u t i o n of a c l e a r and acceptei: s t a n d a r d dfkkhr\

We may conclude by way of recomaendation by q u o t i n g frds

%be beport; of t h e T i v 1.6-Eoc Comlifiee

"The Comrrlf t t e e i s fully aware that there are inclc~&&nt

h & . v i d u a l s an6 groups a c t i v i t y (sic) engaged in ,
rV++arctec i n t o Tiv language (and other languages) s Q h h
ia v e r y encouraging and t h e coxuxL-L tee recommends tnat n
c e n t r a l Cornittee be s e t up perrumently on Tiv lPq$ingc
(%id_ o t h e r major languages) t o co-ordinate and streArr-1iI.u
:he a c t i v i t i e s of these independent individuals &id b o i 5 o s s
$ha c e n t r a l c o r n i t t e e , whet c z t a b l i s h e d , would frorq tia~
ta t i m e e s t a b l i s h s u b - c a u i r ~ i t ~ e efor
s special researeh u ~ c
9%er assignments' (p.45).
 h a l i , S.O.O. (q885) 'Benue Lnngusgeo: The Case o f Tiv'
Unpublished Workshop Paper (Xatsina-Ala).

&.sre, A. (1974) 'Language S t a n d a r d i z a t i o n in Sub-saharaa A f r i c a r

i n Fishman 3. ( e d ) . k d v z n c e s i n Language PlannlYL. TLc
Hague : Mou toa.

Armstrong, R.A. (1979) 'The Histor;! of t h e Study of t h e Benu-e

S t a t e L c q ~ a ~' eUnpublished
s Paper.

Dittnar, N. (1976) Socio1inpyir;t;icti: A C r i t i c a l - . ,Survey CI 7 'C&CG~-J

m d A p p l i c s t i o n Lonclon: Arnold. e
'J

p Ferguson, C.A. ( ~ 9 0 8 )(Language Development' in Fishman 9 $.e t a1

( e d s ) Langiiage Prob3.~rr,s?f Developing Nations. New Yark;
Wiley and bons,

Cnrvin, P. 11964) 'The Standard Lmguage Problemt Conccpts and

MethoCa in Hynes, D, (ed).
New Yark: Harper and Row.
' - -
Languaje i n C u l t u r c and ? E ! ~ ! s

Garvin, 3 , and X ~ t h L o t , M. ( 1 9 6 ~ ) ' T h e Urbanization of Gupk?i$i

A problem i n h n g u a g e an2 C u l t u r e in Wallaoa, A. ( e d c ;.
Man and C u l t u r e s o P h i l a d e l p h i a : U n i v e r s i t v a5 ~hilp.Cela%@.
Press.

Gbor, J.W.T. (1978) Mdugh U Tiv Man Mnyer Ve 3

Gaskiya Corpornt ion.

erecaberg J.B. (7949) ' S t u d i e s i n A f r i c a n L i n ~ u i s t i e

ClassifL.;ation ' in South-Western Journal of A n t h. - w w.
5 , 2 , 99-703. .

- .- (1963) The Lan;yages of Afr5.cn.

a

The Eague : Mouton.

Bloomi,rl$bW --a

.I-
m u g e n , E. (-1966: 'Linguistics and L a a s a g e P l a n n i n g ' %n Bright
W ( e d . ) S o c i o l i n g u i fitics. The Hague: Mouton.
(1971) lXnstrumentation in Language Planning' i~
Rubin, J. and.Jernu62, I3.H. (eds) Can Language Eq. 2k~~nn&?
Honolulu : East-Vest Centre.

- '
( 1983 1 The I m p h a e n t a t i o n of Corpus P l a n n i n g :
Theory and P r a c t i c e in Cobarrubias. J. and Fishflc?. J.1,
-
( e d s . j P r o g r e s s .hLangua~o~ l a n n i n z : ~ n t e r n a t i -.m i -& .
A -

Perspec t i v e f i . B e r l l n : Mouton.

.
*
3kpn, S.A. (198 ) 'Tiv Morphology1 Unpublished Semi+&? Y q E r
at sins-da)
..
Ikpa, S.A.
(Katsirta-Ala) .
(1985) 'Tiv PIorphology' Unpublished Seminar Papar

Jockers H. (1985) lPhanological and Y i r p h o l o g i c e l Processes

.
In v
A ' Unpublifiie d Seminar Paper (Katsina-Ala) . 21 s
%

Koelle , S. ( 1854) Polyp;lotta Af r i k a n a CMS London,

Leith, D. (1983) The S o c i a l History of English. London:
R o ~ t l e d g eand Kegan Paul.
-
Idckwe, P. ( 1964) 1 -
i.

Lmguages, C . P t i l D i s s e r t a t i o n , U n l v e r s i t z o f York.

h+achukwu, P.A. (1983) 9L

jetiraryerd
RoulLcdge and Kegan Paul.
.. -- hnd~tis

Nyickura, J.O. !n. d! 'Morphology: B Grammatic? nch t o

T i v ' . Unpublished Seminar Pii
S a i L d i n ~I&

Rubin, J. (7377) 'Language S t m d a r d i z a t i o n in I n d o n e s i a ' in

--
l?ubin J. e t al (eds.) Language Plar,nln&Procesms.
-
---
Rubin, J a n d Jcrnudd, B,H. (IS) ) Can Language Be P t ~ r i r i e 2 2
Ronoluiu: East-WE& Centre, U ~ i v e r ~ , i t of
y Honolulu P r G w l

h b i n s h , E, (1969) Sons of Tiv. Grand R a p i d s : Baker K G u Z t

3 ~ 3 . .d,B. (1554) "The 'Descent' of t h e Tiv from -1benda hiD-a'!

I n Africa Vol. I V , 295-310.
 Malherbes Orthographz

1. Vowels

a
e
i
o (open) o f v w
o (closed)
u

ou ( d i p h t h o n g )
 Example
a, "he, she"
baal, "salt1'
Abwa, nane of a town
mba, plm-a1 p r e f i
ca, "personal c l a s s

cw or chw cwalegha, bit by bit"

d daa, "to push"
ds dyelegh, H2J&ed11
0

q nd~l,"to wake1'
ndy odyal, 9 0 tread onw
Cz, = 2 - dzege na, "big one1'
= zege na.
dzwa, nmouth;
language = zwa
ijen, hunger
ijwa,- mouths,
. - language,
ndzuul, "to muddle up
= nzuul
el, "to do",
dzege na Big one"
faa "quickly"
igal = fyal
lxghting flash
Phonemes

/gw/ gwabi, digging

stick
-
k?3 m d i , "cudgel"
nguhwal , "floor,
leg"

t3b gbal, "hoe"

ngb (not mgb
because syllabic nghah ,
a l s o occur in 11
t h i s position) roast"
wegh, "hand, am"
be, "new"
hwa, "wildcat"
ibyev, "rat, mousen
ihye, "braceletn
ka, l'it isn
h a , fish-dan

lam, " t o speakn

maa, "build;
mould pot"

ny linya' a horse"
nga' aa, "scrach
w i t h the fingers"
nga' aa, "scratch
with the fingers"
Phonemes

tbw-gb=@;,
to tie) tightly"
01, person
shoese, "any lfvizg
creatures except rmn
00 "was4 the body"

Sam n "seed, grain"

swase, %ay edible

cr'eature wcept n a

(sw) shw ashwe, ~ c d

sorzel"
t

ityo "paternal
relativoerH

/tsw/ tsw
/t;sy/ = /2/ c GP ch (see c , eb.)
/tswy/ = /cv/(t W) cw o r chw icwal, mrectal
(plural,

Val, "fwge metal''

Example

wo, na h i l l t '
iwyo -
ijwo, h i l l s
(plural)
ya, "compound,
village''
z a k i , Lion (Yausa
greeting to a
superigz)
 Ad-Hoc Cornittee Orthogranhy

Phoneme :
1. /a/ a a - he, she
2. /a:/ aa aa - exclamation
3. /b/' b bar - solt
4. /Sw/
5. lab/ mba - plural prefi
in personal c l a s s
c ca - far
(ch -
dropped as
-uecessary)

(chw
cw
- dropped as
cwqlegha
#

- b i t by bit
uecessag.)
d daa - to p w h
dY dyelegh - naked
nd eder - t o wake an
n d ~ ndyar - t o tread on
zwa - mouth, language
ijen - hunger
-
ijo - mouths, languages
IJwe - u n g e d n a t e d -
unrotten y m seed.
nzuul - nzughul - t o
muddle up
e r - t o do; zege na -
b i g one
(Three variant;^)
Fefa - quick;
early
faa -

-offyagh - flash
lighting
Phoneme : Orth o . ~ r a . n h n &=ples:

19- /g/ g ga * not

gwa - fane; gwer
line
-
-do - club; agya
pole
-
nguhar
nguher
-- foot; leg.
to be in
ngu-her - hc/she is ia.

23. / gd nEY Ungwa - to'hear

24. / zgbj ngb (not mgS)
because syllabic /m/
also occurs In this
position) ngbagh
'*
- to roast ..

gb gbar - hoe
gh Uwegh - hand; arm
h he - new; hoe - shmed
hwa - Wild cat
hwe - decoration
h~ ihye - bracelet
i h i e v - r a t , nise
iii --wonder
(ex clamation)
ii - to steal
kw kwa - fish - trap

kp kpagh - cam wood

1 lan - t o talk
 maa - t o build, mould
mas - give b i r t h
ana - who
na - t o give
nwange - nonewater y m
inya-soil -
nyan -
ineat

rmgaa I pame of Town

ng ( a t the end of
word)
ng-aa
gb'ang
- to
w
scrape
$bag; - to
n
t i e firaly

Iyo -6 gnake
Ishqho 0. general pame
f o r any r i v i n g creature
except

rwagh~ar Iroko t r e e

c r e a w e except naa
 59
ishan - star
(sy is ckopped
as non- existent
in Ev)
54. / w/ shw ishwa - beniseed
ashwe - ~orrel
tor - chief .
twar - gae-ing
ityo - pafterml
gelat ives

59. /tsw/ = cw (tw) cw icwar r-recta

(pluraa of tswar)
.
I

60. /tsw/ tsw tswar (OF fese) c p c %

' tswar w yectua
(singulqr icwaz)
u -you (2nd perso3
s i n g u l a . subject ~ P Q Z O E

Uwo - uountain
won-in-law
Ya - compound, village
Zamber - beg; zends,
za - go; journey
zege - bit.