Aklanon Tag- and Extra-Systemic

Linguistic Phenomena

R.Aklanon
David Tag-
Zorc
McNeil Technologies Language Research Center

I am most pleased to have this opportunity to dedicate an article to

Laurie Reid. Unbeknownst to him at the time (1967), he inspired my choice
of a career in linguistics as he lectured a dozen or so starry-eyed Peace Corps
Volunteers on comparative Philippine. Years later in 1973, he was
enormously supportive of my work under Professor Dyen at Yale
encouraging me to present two papers at the First Austronesian Conference
in Honolulu. Furthermore, we both share an avid interest in morphology and
syntax, as well as in language families other than Austronesian. While the
majority of my writings in the Austronesian arena are assumed by some to
have been in the historical-comparative sphere, there are many in applied
linguistics and hence some forrays into language theory. My initial work
with the Peace Corps involved two dialog books for Peace Corps Volunteers,
an Aklanon grammar (Zorc and de la Cruz 1968) and a dictionary (Zorc,
Salas, et al. 1969). My daily work at McNeil Technologies Language
Research Center often involves putting together grammatical sketches for
our Newspaper Reader Series: Cebuano (Zorc 1987), Ilokano (Moguet and
Zorc 1988), Tagalog (Sarra and Zorc 1990), Hiligaynon (Sunio and Zorc
1992), Bikol (Belchez and Moguet 1992), Kapampangan (Davidson and
Pineda 1992) — and even more full-blown treatments outside
Austronesian: Somali (Zorc and Issa 1990), Armenian (Zorc and
Baghdasarian 1995), Oromo (Tucho, Zorc, and Barna 1996), Sotho (Zorc
and Mokabe 1998), and Rwanda-Rundi (Zorc and Nibagwire, In
Preparation). As has been Laurie’s case too, I have been blessed with a
multi-faceted linguistic career that has taken me into the Austronesian,
Australian, Cushitic, Bantu, and Indo-European families. This article
represents a merging of two “loves” of my life: a synchronic theoretical
overview, based upon a perspective of language which has evolved through
the years, with some historically-relevant notes about a closed but
productive system in Aklanon. I trust Laurie and others will enjoy reading it
as much as I did researching and writing it.

1. Overview of Language Systems According to Zorc

Through time, I have noted that there are some paradoxes in linguistics and
language study. The first can be noted between a linguist (who strives for abstractions,
logic, scientific-systemization, elegance), and a speaker or language-learner (who
strives for understanding, communication, rapport). Linguists often have the frustrating
job of looking for logic that may not always be there: true DUALITY OF PATTERNING! But
the second is more significant and disappointing: many linguists, who profess to deal

124

Zorc
Tuesday, November 29, 2005 2:45:22 PM
 AKLANON Tag- 125

with some aspect of language, often fail to write in a manner that will communicate
with language students, who, of all potential readers or users, are most in need of
understanding what they are writing about. The excessive use of jargon and the
proselytizing of a given linguistic theory become insurmountable obstacles for the vast
majority of language learners. In well-researched and well-known languages there is no
harm done, but in the arena of less commonly taught languages with precious few if any
resources, the consequences are no less than tragic.
As a personal and relevant example, in 1998 I was learning Xhosa in order to
produce a Xhosa Newspaper Reader. I was wearing the hat of a learner, rather than one of
a linguist. In looking for references, I had assumed that a 417 page Xhosa Syntax (Du
Plessis and Visser 1992) would serve me better than a 60 page manual (Einhorn and
Siyengo 1990). Alas, the syntax turned out to be a transformational grammar of the
language – while replete with diagrams for specific sentence constructions, it did not
contain a single table of noun classes, agreement forms, pronouns, deictics, or verb
inflections. One must read through the entire tome to come to grips with the overall
language structure, drawing one’s own tables (and conclusions) along the way.
Meanwhile, the brief manual was replete with tables of noun classes, agreement forms,
adjectives, verb conjugations, relative constructions, etc., and it presents in a
readily-accessible graphic form exactly what I need to know.
I propose that we linguists should be dealing with and describing seven systems (or
levels of abstraction) for any given language (see Table 1). These form the basic
machinery of human speech and include:
1. PHONOLOGICAL - the SOUND SYSTEM which contains the various sounds
used to build up words. Anyone who has learned a different language
knows how difficult this can be. People who do not master the sound
system often speak with a heavy accent. Regional variations within a
language represent dialects that almost always have a different
pronunciation characterizing that locale.
2. MORPHOLOGICAL - the system involved with WORD BUILDING.
3. SYNTACTIC - the grammatical system that determines the ORDER AND
SHAPE OF WORDS in any given sentence.
4. LEXICAL - the WORD SYSTEM, specific for each language community,
where forms are made to conform with the daily needs of the speakers.
5. SEMANTIC - the MEANING SYSTEM, where words and expressions get both
their basic meaning and special overtones.
6. PRAGMATIC - the DISCOURSE SYSTEM, where appropriate words and
patterns are selected for the specific situation at hand. Pronouns, both
personal and demonstrative, which were traditionally taught as part of
the grammar, are always discourse sensitive and governed by
language-specific pragmatics.
7. ETHNOLOGICAL - the CULTURAL OR SOCIOLOGICAL SYSTEM within which
language fits.
Each of these systems are both independent and interdependent. The
independence of some has been well attested in linguistic studies that have dealt with,
say, just the phonology of a language, its morphology and syntax, or its lexicon (i.e., a
dictionary). The other levels have also received attention, to varying degrees, in the
literature, such as the burgeoning field of pragmatics. Meanwhile, ethnological

Zorc
Tuesday, November 29, 2005 2:45:22 PM
 126 R. DAVID ZORC

phenomena have been limited to specialties such as sociolinguistics, anthropology, or

psycholinguistics.
Their interdependence, however, has not received a great deal of attention, and it
is here that I have recognized phenomena that have “slipped through the cracks” of one
linguistic theory or another. True, when elements at the morphological and
phonological levels intercept, there is the concept of MORPHOPHONEME. Within
semantics, there has been discussion of the denotation (actual meaning) and
connotation (implications) of words, but I would propose that what is happening in the
case of a word like ‘piss’ is that besides its semantic characteristic (urine) it carries a
culturally-imposed overtone of {rude}, i.e., its full explanation is ETHNOSEMANTIC.
There is no linguistic study or textbook (to my knowledge) that has treated the three
click sounds of English (bilabial, alveolar, and retroflex), probably because they are
consonantal phones that do not combine with vowels. Nevertheless, at the
ethnolinguistic level, we can and do express sympathy or irritation with an alveolar
click (spelled tsk), cowboys urge horses on with the retroflex click, and rude standers-by
express appreciation of a woman’s beauty with the bilabial click (kiss). I call these
ETHNOPHONES, because they are sounds triggered by and in response to a specific
cultural situation.
Sometimes a given phenomenon is located within a single system, such as the
{causative} pa- in Philippine and other Austronesian languages, -is- in Bantu languages,
-i in Somali, -ts’nel in Armenian. Such languages have a single morphological causative
construction. Sometimes, it may be spread across a single system, as in Oromo, where a
series of lexically-determined suffixes (-s-, -eess-, -is-, -sis-, -siis-) are involved. But it can
also be spread across several systems, and therefore be less readily apparent, as the case
is in English where {causative} can be:
MORPHOLOGICAL (the prefix en- as in enlarge or the suffix -en as in sweeten),
THEMATIC (as with boil, cool, run which constitute intransitive-transitive
pairs),
LEXICAL (die vs. kill),
SYNTACTIC (using an auxiliary like cause someone to verb), or
PRAGMATIC (where let implies willingness on the part of the caused actor /
unwillingness on the part of the causer, while make implies willingness on
the part of the causer / unwillingness on the part of the caused actor).
If one proposes that {causative} is an element of universal grammar, then it is
MORPHOLOGICAL in languages like Aklanon, Tagalog, Somali, Sotho, Xhosa, and
Oromo, but POLYSYSTEMIC in English.
There are also instances where a grammatical element is EXTRASYSTEMIC. That is,
while there may be a full paradigm of forms which may be considered regular, there can
be one or a few elements that are not part of this system. They are usually IRREGULAR,
SECONDARY, and DEFECTIVE, i.e., they do not inflect according to the canons of the
primary system. This is where Aklanon tag- fits into the scheme of things.

2. Aklanon Tag-
Aklanon is a member of the western Bisayan subgroup (along with Kinaray-a and
Kuyonon) (Zorc 1972). Its higher-order sister-languages include Cebuano, Hiligaynon,
and Waray, which are all in a macro-subgroup with Tagalog and Bikol (at the Central
Philippine level) (Zorc 1977). Data presented here either come from the Aklanon
Dictionary (Zorc, Salas, et al. 1969) or from my wife, Maria Nellie Reyes Prado Zorc.

Zorc
Tuesday, November 29, 2005 2:45:22 PM
 AKLANON Tag- 127

Aklanon tag- is a productive derivational morpheme with the meaning ‘feel like.’ It
was described in Zorc and de la Cruz (1968:128f) as a ‘stative verb qualifier,’ taking
only the na- (real) and ma- (unreal) prefixes. What I have come to realize since, is that it
is EXTRASYSTEMIC precisely because it is used with so few members of the verb
conjugation (just three: na- PRESENT or PAST, ma- FUTURE, and -un DEPENDENT, see
Table 2 for the standard full verb paradigm).

(1) Natandihú? ?akú ?it dú:ru.

PRES.feel.excrete I OBJ very much
‘I really have to go to the bathroom!’

(2) Ka?í:nah natandihú? ?akú ?it dú:ru.

earlier PAST.feel.excrete I OBJ very much
‘A while ago, I really had to go to the bathroom!’

(3) Ayáw ?it súksuk ?it háyhil, bá:si?

NEG:IMP OBJ wear OBJ highheel, maybe

matagsa?út ka sa báyli.
FUT.feel.dance you LOC dance
‘Don’t wear high heels, you might feel like dancing at the party.’ (sá:?ut ‘dance’)

(4) Kun imnún mu tanán, gústu mu

if drink.DEP you all, want you

tag?ihi?ún ka sa dá:Ean?
feel.urinate.DEP you LOC road
‘If you drink it all, do you want to have to urinate while on the road?’

Unlike most verbal forms, which preserve the original accent pattern of the root, tag-
may alternatively have a word-final effect on the accent pattern of any derivation with an
open penult (regardless of where the accent originally falls). While exemplified correctly,
but not recognized explicitly in Zorc and de la Cruz, this and other morphologically-
determined accent patterns were described in Zorc 1977:64-69. Although some doubleting
may occur, note in the following examples how accent may fall on the ultima, even if the
root has a long penult, yielding a rightward accent pattern:
(5) natag?ihí? ‘feel like urinating’ (?í:hi? ‘urine; urinate’)
natagtangís ~ natagtá:ngis ‘feel like crying’ (tá:ngis ‘cry’)
natagpá:naw ‘feel like leaving’ (pá:naw ‘go away, leave on a trip’) [long
penult only]
nataghalín ‘feel like leaving’ (halín ‘leave, go somewhere else’)
nataghibayág ‘feel like laughing’ (hibayág ‘laugh’)
Although the examples immediately above are intransitive and take the usual topic
or subject pronouns (akó ‘I,’ ikáw ‘you,’ imáw ‘he/she,’ etc.), the prefix can be used with
verbs that take objects as well, e.g.,

(6) Natag?inúm akó ?it Tandú?ay.

PRES.feel.drink I OBJ Tanduay(Rum)
‘I feel like drinking Tanduay (Rum).’ (?inúm ‘drink’)

Zorc
Tuesday, November 29, 2005 2:45:22 PM
 128 R. DAVID ZORC

(7) Natagka?ún ~ natagká:?un akó ?it mángga.

PRES.feel.eat PRES.feel.eat I OBJ mango
‘I feel like eating mangoes.’ (ká:?un ‘eat’).

(8) NatagbakáE akó ?it ?áwto.

PAST.feel.buy I OBJ car
‘I felt like buying a car.’ (bakáE ‘buy’)

According to the phonotactic rules of Aklanon (and other Bisayan dialects), if the
penult has a closed syllable, the accent always falls on the penult (Zorc 1977:243f).
Hence no other accent pattern is possible on the following:

(9) Natag?ádtuh akó sa báyli.

PRES.feel.go I LOC dance
‘I feel like going to the dance.’ (?ádtuh ‘go’)

(10) Natagsímbah akó.

PRES.feel.worship I
‘I feel like going to church.’ (símbah ‘worship’)

Dozens more examples could be given. This affix is productive. It has one
lexically-determined allomorph taN- in the form: natandihú? ‘feel like defecating’
(reduction of pandíhu? ‘excrement (human)’ [N]; ‘to excrete’ [V]). However, this
derivation is strictly limited to sentient/control verbs. It is decidedly excluded from all
meteorological verbs, thus:
(11) **nataguEán [incorrect] ‘feel like raining’ 1 1

**nataghangín [incorrect] ‘feel like being windy’

However, there is a noun derivation with a tag- prefix yielding SEASON NOUNS,
which does not affect the accent pattern, i.e., the accent pattern of the root is
maintained:
(12) tag?uEán ‘rainy season’ (?uEán ‘rain’ [N, V])
tag?í:nit ‘hot season’ (?í:nit ‘heat’ [N, V])
taghá:ngin ‘windy season’ (há:ngin ‘wind’ [N])

3. Some Possible Historical Connections

Mintz (1994) describes what I see as a cognate prefix in Malay and Indonesian
thus: “Ter- is a verbal and adjectival affix used to indicate a final or completed state.
How this state is reached, whether intentionally or unintentionally, actively or
passively, is not considered significant when this affix is used.”

1
The capital E is an unrounded back semivowel which the Aklanons spell with “e.” Hence this
orthographic symbol has two values: in vowel position, CV(C), it is pronounced as the front
mid vowel in Spanish loanwords, e.g., pwede; in consonant position, it is the unrounded back
semivowel. It was originally interpreted as a voiced velar fricative (Blake, early Zorc), but it
lacks friction. The IPA symbol for the semivowel is Greek omega, while for the consonant it is
a small Greek gamma.

Zorc
Tuesday, November 29, 2005 2:45:22 PM
 AKLANON Tag- 129

With adjectives it “indicates a superlative or an intensive state” (Ibid.), e.g.,

terbagus ‘best, very best (at s.t.)’; terbaik ‘best, highest in quality’; terbesar ‘largest’.
With verbs, “the resultant meaning is most commonly a final or completed state
with no particular consideration as to how that state was reached” (Op. cit., p.178),
e.g., terdapat ‘be found’; terletak ‘be located’.
Such verbs are semantically passive, but not morphologically so (since di- is the
morphological passive). However, if the verb is semantically active, then accidentality,
unintentionality or minimal agent responsibility is implied (Op. cit., p.180; Phillip
Thomas, pers. comm.), e.g., terlihat ‘accidentally saw’; tertidur ‘dozed off, happened to
fall asleep’; terrasa marah ‘felt sudden rage’. Thus, depending on context, Malay
terbuka? can mean ‘OBJECT is open’ or ‘AGENT accidentally opened (something).’
There is clearly a significant distance between Aklanon taghibayág ‘feel like
laughing’ and Malay tertawa ‘burst into laughter.’ Nevertheless, along the lines deduced
by Mintz, I see a semantic thread of {CURRENT RELEVANCE} connecting the disparate
meanings and functions of this prefix. This is an aspect of the “perfective” verbal
morphology I have encountered in Cushitic (e.g., Oromo) and Bantu (e.g., Swahili and
Sotho) languages. While the literal translation of many verbs with this special inflection
might seem to be ‘have VERBed,’ it implies that the action has current relevance, e.g.,
‘has arrived (and is still here)’ or ‘is hungry (= has become hungry and is still so).’ The
Aklanon verbal affix, while translationally equivalent to English ‘feel like’ can be seen
to have evolved from ‘VERB is currently relevant,’ just as the Aklanon season nouns from
‘NOUN is currently relevant.’
Rasoloson and Rubino (2005) contrast two Malagasy RESULTATIVES (voa- and
tafa-), where tafa- marks actions with more control than voa-. Neither “inflect for
IMPERATIVE mode or PAST TENSE” (and are hence EXTRASYSTEMIC). Their description
reads as follows:
Tafa- resultatives often encode a coincidental or unexpected state of
affairs. The subject of tafa- resultatives exercises more control to bring about
the resultant state than the subject of a voa- formative.

(13) Tafavèrina tèto Antananarìvo ny Filòha Zàfy.

RES.return PAST.PRX.VIS Antananarìvo DEF NR.head Zafy
‘President Zafy happened to return to Antananarivo.’

Keenan (1998:590) notes that “voa- may be used with reduplicated roots, while
tafa- may not, e.g., voalazalàza ‘said a bit’; tafavèrina ‘returned’, but not
**tafaverimbèrina.”
Etymologically, this prefix probably derives from either *ta-pa- or *taR-pa-, since
Malagasy lost PAN *R in inherited forms. While they do not inflect for the past, the do
indicate result or {accidental state achieved}. This is partially reminiscent of some of
the functions of Malay ter-.
I suspect there is a common thread in adjective derivations with this prefix in
Malay and other Austronesian languages (attributive state achieved), accidental senses
(action or state achieved), all the way to stative nouns in some languages (e.g., ‘age’ or
‘fat’-state, even ‘expertise’ achieved). The existence of *taR- in the morphology of PAN
would appear to be justified, but as is the case in Aklanon and Malay, it probably was
not paradigmatic or systemic (e.g., within the verbal inflectional system of *-um-, *-en,
*Si-, *-an, *-in-, etc.) and hence could shift to specialized functions and senses, such as
{excessive} or {superlative}. Since other verb paradigms were available for standard

Zorc
Tuesday, November 29, 2005 2:45:23 PM
 130 R. DAVID ZORC

stative expressions, i.e., *na-, *ma-, special senses of {accidentally-so} or {overtaken

by} could evolve.
Since *taR- was non-systemic, it would have been far more fragile and subject to
loss. Thus, Tagalog does not have an equivalent verbal prefix to Aklanon, but it has been
preserved as a season marker (tag?ulán ‘rainy season,’ tagdilím ‘period of the new
moon,’ taggútom ‘famine, period of starvation,’ etc. It has been lost in the verbal
morphology of Tagalog, but not in Aklanon (a near genetic relative). In Tausug, a
member of the South Bisayan branch, taga- (with a fricative g) has an innovative
existential attributive or quasi-possessive function, e.g., tagalayag ‘having sails’ or
tagabu’aya ‘having crocodiles.’
Alternatively, there may have been several (possibly different) affixes, or even an
entire affix system: *t-, *ta-, *taR-, *taRa-, *tara-, all of which may have been
etymologically related. One might propose that forms analyzable with a prefix *tara-
are a combination of a prefix *ta- + the infix *<ar>. The central Philippine evidence
(e.g., Aklanon tag-) along with Malay ter- rather clearly points to a Western
Austronesian *taR-, which could be *ta- + *R- DURATIVE VERB, much like *maR- may
have been *ma- + *R-. The widespread central Philippine prefix taga- ‘hailing from’
(Tagalog, Aklanon, Cebuano, etc.), e.g., tagaMaynila? ‘native of Manila,’ tagaBisáya?
‘Bisayan,’ may further derive from *ta- + *R- + *a- PROGRESSIVE, IMPERFECTIVE. There
is also, for example, the derivation of Rukai locative and/or time nouns, e.g., takanöan
‘eating place = table’ or tatubian ‘crying place or time,’ (Li 1973:292), which is
reminiscent of the Aklanon and Tagalog season marker tag-. Since most dialects of
Rukai have lost PAN *R (i.e., *R > zero) it could be further evidence for *taR- in that
function, or ambiguously for a separate (reduced) prefix *ta-. The latter appears to be
contained in a widespread reconstruction such as PAN *talikúd ‘turn one’s back on’ >
Aklanon, Tagalog talikód ‘turn one’s back to,’ Fijian talikura ‘warm oneself by the fire,’
(Dempwolff 1938:96) Kanakanabu t<ar>a?iku?ikúcu ‘look back,’ Paiwan tjailukuz
‘more to the rear.’ This same prefix appears to be frozen on several Aklanon verbs, e.g.,
takuróng ‘put a crown on,’ takilíd ‘turn the side to,’ talíwan ‘pass by, go by,’ talibág ‘be
out of order’ (Zorc and de la Cruz 1968:115).
Considerably more problematic is the kinship prefix PAN *t-, found on etymologies
such as PAN *tama ‘father’ > Fijian tama, Tongan tama/?i, Samoan tama:, Futuna
tama/na, Bunun tama?, Takituduh tamah, Saisiyat tamQh [ref], PAN*tina ‘mother’ >
Malay be/tina ‘mother animal,’ Fijian, Samoan tina, Tongan tsina, Futuna tsina/na,
Takituduh tináh, Saisiyat tinQh [ref], PMP *tumpu ‘ancestor, forebear’, PMP *tu[h]aji
‘younger sibling.’ If at all related, it could be the result of syncope, or it could also be a
reshaping of *ta- to a single consonant kin-term marker. In a society where paternal
uncles and maternal aunts took on the responsibility of raising orphaned relatives, the
application of {currently relevant} mother or father is not far-fetched.
To return to my overview of language, Aklanon tag- and PAN *taR- are (and were)
extra-systemic morphemes, and, as such have “slipped through the cracks.” Thus far
there is only a small amount of serious evidence for the reconstruction of an elusive PAN
affix, *taR-. However, fuller details of the morphology of Austronesian languages are
slowly coming to light. I hope to have explained its rather limited function in Aklanon
and trust this will spur similar studies. Evidence for this affix could be lurking
throughout the family.

Zorc
Tuesday, November 29, 2005 2:45:23 PM
 AKLANON Tag- 131

Abbreviations

CONTIN continuous PAN Proto-Austronesian

DEF definite PAST past tense
DEP dependent tense PMP Proto-Malayo-Polynesian
FUT future tense PRES present tense
IMP imperative mood PROGRES progressive
LOC locative ref referent
NEG negative RES resultative
NR nominalizer PRX proximate
OBJ object VIS visible

Zorc
Tuesday, November 29, 2005 2:45:23 PM
 132 R. DAVID ZORC

Appendix 1

Table 1. Language systems or levels

Simple Term Study Abstraction Example

sound phonology phone /p/
word building morphology morpheme re-, un-, -ed
grammon, part of
grammar syntax noun, verb, word order
speech
lexicon lexicography lexeme, word “gander”
meaning semantics sememe {male + goose}
discourse pragmatics texteme he did ( = John ate)
body language; rude vs.
culture ethnology ethneme
polite speech levels

Note: There are mixtures of levels, e.g.,

MORPHOPHONEME - wives = wayFS, different from fifes and hives

ETHNOPHONEME - the click sounds of English (e.g., tsk to express disapproval)

ETHNOSEMEME - the vulgar connotation of some words disallows their use in polite
society or mixed company, yet scientific synonyms are acceptable.

Zorc
Tuesday, November 29, 2005 2:45:23 PM
 AKLANON Tag- 133

Table 2. Aklanon verb conjugation

Past Progres. Contin. Future Command

Active
Punctual -um- [none] -um- ma- #- (zero)
Durative nag- naga- mag- maga- pag-
Distributive naN- nagapaN- maN- magapaN- magpaN-
Potential naka- naka- maka- maka- [none]
Direct Passive
Punctual -in- [none] -un -un -a
Durative gin- gina- pag- -un paga- -un pag- -a
Distributive ginpaN- ginapaN- paN- -un paN- -un
Potential na- na- ma- ma- [none]
Instrumental
Punctual -in- [none] i- i- -án
Durative gin- gina- ig- iga- i(pag)-
Distributive ginpaN- ginapaN- ipaN- ipaN- ipaN-
Potential nai- nai- mai- mai- [none]
(alternate) kina- kina- ika- ika- [none]
Local Passive
Punctual -in- -an [none] -an -an -i
Durative gin- -an gina- -an pag- -an paga- -an pag- -i
Distributive ginpaN- -an ginapaN- -an paN- -an paN- -an paN- -i
Potential na- -an na- -an ma- -an ma- -an [none]

Zorc
Tuesday, November 29, 2005 2:45:23 PM
 134 R. DAVID ZORC

References

Belchez, Chito A., and Pamela Johnstone-Moguet. 1992. Bikol newspaper reader, with a
grammatical introduction by R. David Zorc. Kensington: Dunwoody Press.
Davidson, Alma M., and Leonardo Aquino Pineda. 1992. Kapampangan reader, with a
grammatical introduction by R. David Zorc. Kensington: Dunwoody Press.
Dempwolff, Otto. 1934–38. Vergleichende Lautlehre des Austronesischen Wortschatzes.
Zeitschrift für Eingeborenen Sprachen 15, 17, 19. Berlin: Dietrich Reimer.
Du Plessis, J. A. [Jacobus Albertus], and M. W. Visser. 1992. Xhosa syntax. Pretoria: Via
Afrika.
Einhorn, E, and L. Siyengo. 1990. Xhosa: A concise manual. Capetown: College of
Careers (Pty.) Ltd.
Ferrell, Raleigh. 1969. Taiwan aboriginal groups: Problems in cultural and linguistic
classification. Institute of Ethnology, Academia Sinica, Monograph No. 17. Taipei:
Academia Sinica.
Ferrell, Raleigh. 1982. Paiwan dictionary. Pacific Linguistics C–73. Canberra: Australian
National University.
Li, Paul Jen-kuei. 1973. Rukai structure. Institute of History and Philology, Academia
Sinica, Special Publications No. 64. Taipei: Academia Sinica.
Li, Paul Jen-kuei. 1978. A comparative vocabulary of Saisiyat dialects. The Bulletin of the
Institute of History and Philology 49 (2):133–199.
Mintz, Malcolm W. 1994. A student’s grammar of Malay and Indonesian. Singapore: EPB
Publishers.
Moguet, Pamela Johnstone-, and R. David Zorc. 1988. Ilokano newspaper reader.
Kensington: Dunwoody Press.
Rasoloson-Wermter, Janie, and Carl Rubino. 2005. Malagasy. The Austronesian
languages of Asia and Madagascar, ed. by Nikolaus P. Himmelmann and K.
Alexander Adelaar. Routledge Language Family Series 7. London:
Routledge/Curzon Press.
Sarra, Annabelle M., and R. David Zorc. 1990. Tagalog newspaper reader. Kensington:
Dunwoody Press.
Sunio, Delicia, and R. David Zorc. 1992. Hiligaynon reader. Kensington: Dunwoody
Press.
Tsuchida, Shigeru. 1969. Word list of three Bunun dialects (Isbukun, Takituduh, and
TakbanuaD). Typescript.
Tucho, Yigazu, R. David Zorc, and Eleanor Barna. 1996. Oromo newspaper reader,
grammar sketch, and lexicon. Kensington: Dunwoody Press.
Zorc, R. David. 1972. The Western subgroup of Bisayan. Oceanic Linguistics
11 (2):110–139.

Zorc
Tuesday, November 29, 2005 2:45:23 PM
 AKLANON Tag- 135

Zorc, R. David. 1977. The Bisayan dialects of the Philippines: Subgrouping and
reconstruction. Pacific Linguistics C–44. Canberra: The Australian National
University.
Zorc, R. David. 1987. Cebuano newspaper reader. Kensington: Dunwoody Press.
Zorc, R. David, and Louisa Baghdasarian. 1995. Armenian (Eastern) newspaper reader
and grammar. Kensington: Dunwoody Press.
Zorc, R. David, and Beato de la Cruz. 1968. A study of the Aklanon dialect, Volume 1:
Grammar. Kalibo: Aklan Printing Center.
Zorc, R. David, and Abdullahi Issa. 1990. Somali textbook. Kensington: Dunwoody Press.
Zorc, R. David, and Paul Mokabe. 1998. Sotho newspaper reader, grammar sketch, and
lexicon. Kensington: Dunwoody Press.
Zorc, R. David, and Louise Nibagwire. In preparation. Kinyarwanda-Kirundi comparative
grammar. Springfield: Dunwoody Press.
Zorc, R. David, Vicente Salas, et al. 1969. A study of the Aklanon dialect, Volume 2:
Aklanon-English dictionary. Kalibo: Aklan Printing Center.

Zorc
Tuesday, November 29, 2005 2:45:23 PM