| Torricelli | |
|---|---|
| Torricelli Range – Sepik Coast | |
| Geographic distribution | Torricelli Range and coast, northernPapua New Guinea (East Sepik, Sandaun, and Madang provinces) |
| Linguistic classification | One of the world's primarylanguage families |
| Subdivisions | |
| Language codes | |
| Glottolog | nucl1708 (Nuclear Torricelli) |
 The Torricelli languages as classified byFoley (2018) | |
TheTorricelli languages are afamily of about fifty languages of the northernPapua New Guinea coast, spoken by about 80,000 people. They are named after theTorricelli Mountains. The most populous and best known Torricelli language isArapesh, with about 30,000 speakers.
They are not clearly related to other Papuan language families; however, attempts have been made to establish external links.[1] The most promising[clarification needed] external relationship for the Torricelli family is theSepik languages. (In reconstructions of both families, the pronouns have a plural suffix*-m and adual suffix*-p.)
C.L. Voorhoeve (1987) has proposed that they are related to theNorth Halmahera languages and most of the languages of theBird’s Head Peninsula, thus forming the easternmost extension of the postulatedWest Papuan family.[2]
The Torricelli languages occupy three geographically separated areas, evidently separated by later migrations ofSepik-language speakers several centuries ago. Foley considers the Torricelli languages to be autochthonous to theTorricelli Mountains and nearby surrounding areas, having been resident in the region for at least several millennia. The current distribution ofLower Sepik-Ramu and Sepik (especiallyNdu) reflects later migrations from the south and the east.[3] Foley notes that theLower Sepik andNdu groups have lower internal diversity comparable to that of theGermanic andRomance languages, while internal diversity within the Torricelli family is considerably higher.
The Torricelli languages are unusual among Papuan languages in having a basic clause order of SVO (subject–verb–object); in contrast, most Papuan languages have SOV order. It was previously believed that the Torricelli word order was a result of contact with Austronesian languages, but Donohue (2005) believes it is more likely that SVO order was present in the Torricelli proto-language.[4]
Torricelli languages display many typological features that are direct opposites of features typical in the much more widespreadTrans-New Guinea languages.[5]
However,Bogia andMarienberg languages have SOV word order and postpositions, likely as a result of convergence withLower Sepik-Ramu andSepik languages, which are predominantly SOV.[5]
Torricelli languages also lackclause chaining constructions, and therefore have no trueconjunctions or clause-linking affixes.[5] Clauses are often simply juxtaposed.
In Torricelli andLower Sepik-Ramu languages, phonological properties of nouns can even determine gender.[5]
Like in theYuat andLower Sepik-Ramu languages, nouns in Torricelli languages are inflected for number, which is a typological feature not generally found in theTrans–New Guinea,Sepik,Lakes Plain,West Papuan,Alor–Pantar, andTor–Kwerba language families.[6]
Wilhelm Schmidt linked the Wapei and Monumbo branches, and the coastal western and eastern extremes of the family, in 1905. The family was more fully established by David Laycock in 1965. Most recently, Ross broke up Laycock and Z’graggen's (1975)Kombio branch, placing the Kombio language in the Palei branch and leaving Wom as on its own, with the other languages (Eitiep,Torricelli (Lou),Yambes,Aruek) unclassified due to lack of data. Usher tentatively separates Monumbo, Marienberg, and theTaiap (Gapun) language from the rest of the family in a 'Sepik Coast' branch.[7]
Foley (2018) provides the following classification.[3]
Foley rejects Laycock's (1975)Kombio-Arapeshan grouping, instead splitting up into theArapesh andUrim groups.
Glottolog v4.8 presents the following classification for the "Nuclear Torricelli" languages:[8]
In addition,Hammarström et al. do not accept the placement of theBogia languages within Torricelli, stating that "no evidence [for this] was ever presented".[9]
The pronouns Ross (2005) reconstructs for proto-Torricelli are
| singular | proto-Torricelli | dual | proto-Torricelli | plural | proto-Torricelli |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| I | *ki | we two | *ku-p | we | *ku-m, *əpə |
| thou | *yi, *ti | you two | *ki-p | you | *ki-m, *ipa |
| he | *ətə-n, *ni | they two (M) | *ma-k | they (M) | *ətə-m, *ma, *apa- |
| she | *ətə-k, *ku | they two (F) | *kwa-k | they (F) | *ətə-l |
Foley (2018) reconstructs the independent personal pronouns *ki ‘I’ and *(y)i ‘thou’, and *(y)ip ‘you (pl)’. Foley considers the second-person pronouns to be strong diagnostics for determining membership in the Torricelli family.
Foley (2018) reconstructs the following subject agreement prefixes for proto-Torricelli.[3]
| sg | pl | |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | *k- | |
| 2 | ||
| 3m | *n- | *m- |
| 3f | *w- |
A cognate set for 'louse' in Torricelli languages as compiled by Dryer (2022):[10]
| Language (group) | louse |
|---|---|
| Marienberg | nəmi, ɲumo, ɲɛm, ɲimi |
| Central Wapei | nəmk, nəmeiləm, nimim |
| East Wapei | nəmaŋgar, namkar |
| Wanap | ɲiməl |
| Urat | ŋumbu |
| Kombio | ɲumək, niumukn, ɲumukŋun |
| Arapeshan | numunəl, nəmaŋgof |
| Wom | numulɛ |
| West Palei | ɲmulol |
| Urim | nmin |
| Maimai | yomata |
| East Palei | ymunə, ymul |
| West Wapei | muni, moni, munola |