Enter a player name to begin or load your saved progress.
The Nilo-Saharan language family is proposed to encompass approximately 210 languages spoken by around 70 million people across Central, North-Central, and East Africa.
Answer: True
Explanation: The Nilo-Saharan family is proposed to comprise approximately 210 languages spoken by roughly 70 million individuals, distributed across Central, North-Central, and East Africa.
The geographic distribution of Nilo-Saharan languages may be linked to ancient watercourses during the African humid period, prior to the 4.2-kiloyear event.
Answer: True
Explanation: The distribution of Nilo-Saharan languages might reflect ancient watercourses present during the African humid period, before the 4.2-kiloyear event, a time when the Sahara was more habitable.
Languages like Dinka, Maasai, and Ngambay are noted to have over a million speakers within the Nilo-Saharan family.
Answer: True
Explanation: Several Nilo-Saharan languages, including Dinka, Maasai, and Ngambay, are reported to have over a million speakers, indicating their significant demographic presence.
According to the source, what is the approximate number of languages and speakers constituting the proposed Nilo-Saharan family?
Answer: Approximately 210 languages spoken by 70 million people.
Explanation: The Nilo-Saharan family is proposed to comprise approximately 210 languages spoken by around 70 million people.
What potential environmental factor might explain the geographic distribution of Nilo-Saharan languages?
Answer: Ancient watercourses during the African humid period.
Explanation: The geographic distribution of Nilo-Saharan languages may be associated with ancient watercourses that existed during the African humid period, prior to the 4.2-kiloyear event.
Which of the following Nilo-Saharan languages is NOT mentioned as having over a million speakers in the provided source material?
Answer: Meroitic
Explanation: The source lists Luo, Acholi, and Maasai among the Nilo-Saharan languages with over a million speakers; Meroitic is not mentioned in this context.
Joseph Greenberg's seminal proposal for the Nilo-Saharan language family was published in 1954, defining it as a grouping of languages not fitting into the Khoisan family.
Answer: False
Explanation: Joseph Greenberg proposed the Nilo-Saharan family in his 1963 book, 'The Languages of Africa,' classifying it as a grouping of languages not already categorized within the Niger-Congo, Afroasiatic, or Khoisan families.
Diedrich Westermann's 1912 'Niloto-Sudanic' proposal included Nilotic languages and some Central Sudanic families.
Answer: True
Explanation: Diedrich Westermann's 1912 proposal, termed 'Niloto-Sudanic,' incorporated Nilotic languages and certain Central Sudanic families, laying groundwork for later classifications.
Greenberg's 1963 'Nilo-Saharan' proposal was formed by connecting Chari-Nile to Songhai, Saharan, Maban, Fur, and Koman-Gumuz.
Answer: True
Explanation: Joseph Greenberg's 1963 'Nilo-Saharan' proposal expanded his earlier 'Chari-Nile' concept by incorporating Songhai, Saharan, Maban, Fur, and Koman-Gumuz.
According to Greenberg's 1963 classification, the Chari-Nile core included Central Sudanic, Kunama, Berta, and Western Sudanic branches.
Answer: False
Explanation: In Greenberg's 1963 classification, the Chari-Nile core comprised Central Sudanic, Kunama, Berta, and Eastern Sudanic branches, not Western Sudanic.
Lionel Bender's 1991 proposal grouped Fur and Maban into a single branch and considered Kunama an independent branch.
Answer: True
Explanation: Lionel Bender's revisions in 1991 included grouping Fur and Maban into a single branch and classifying Kunama as an independent branch within his proposed Nilo-Saharan structure.
Christopher Ehret's classification, which nested Songhay within a core group, was widely accepted by other researchers.
Answer: False
Explanation: Christopher Ehret's proposed classification of Nilo-Saharan, which included nesting Songhay within a core group, was not widely accepted by other researchers.
Blench (2010) proposed that Saharan and Songhay languages are distantly related, a view previously suggested by Greenberg.
Answer: False
Explanation: Blench (2010) proposed a close relationship between Saharan and Songhay languages, a view not previously suggested by Greenberg.
Gregersen (1972) proposed a 'Kongo-Saharan' grouping that included Nilo-Saharan and Niger-Congo languages.
Answer: True
Explanation: Gregersen's 1972 proposal, termed 'Kongo-Saharan,' aimed to group the Nilo-Saharan and Niger-Congo language families.
Georgiy Starostin's 2017 'Macro-Sudanic' proposal suggests a genetic link between Macro-East Sudanic and Macro-Central Sudanic.
Answer: True
Explanation: Georgiy Starostin's 2017 'Macro-Sudanic' proposal posits a genetic relationship between Macro-East Sudanic and Macro-Central Sudanic, based on lexicostatistical analysis.
Who is credited with proposing the Nilo-Saharan family in his 1963 book, 'The Languages of Africa'?
Answer: Joseph Greenberg
Explanation: Joseph Greenberg is credited with proposing the Nilo-Saharan family in his influential 1963 publication, 'The Languages of Africa'.
What was the primary basis for Joseph Greenberg's initial classification of the Nilo-Saharan family?
Answer: Grouping languages not already classified within Niger-Congo, Afroasiatic, or Khoisan.
Explanation: Greenberg's initial classification of Nilo-Saharan was primarily based on grouping together African languages that did not fit into the previously established Niger-Congo, Afroasiatic, or Khoisan families.
How did Greenberg's 1963 'Nilo-Saharan' concept differ from his earlier 'Chari-Nile' proposal?
Answer: It incorporated Songhai, Saharan, Maban, Fur, and Koman-Gumuz.
Explanation: Greenberg's 1963 'Nilo-Saharan' concept expanded his earlier 'Chari-Nile' proposal by incorporating the Songhai, Saharan, Maban, Fur, and Koman-Gumuz language groups.
Christopher Ehret's classification of Nilo-Saharan was characterized by:
Answer: Excluding the Kadu languages and proposing Songhay as a primary branch.
Explanation: Christopher Ehret's classification excluded Kadu languages and proposed Songhay as a primary branch, a model that did not achieve widespread acceptance among researchers.
Blench's 2010 proposal suggested a close relationship between which two language groups?
Answer: Saharan and Songhay
Explanation: Blench's 2010 proposal posited a close relationship between the Saharan and Songhay language groups.
The 'Kongo-Saharan' proposal by Gregersen (1972) aimed to group which two major language families?
Answer: Nilo-Saharan and Niger-Congo
Explanation: Gregersen's 1972 'Kongo-Saharan' proposal sought to group the Nilo-Saharan and Niger-Congo language families.
Georgiy Starostin's 2017 'Macro-Sudanic' proposal posits a genetic relationship between which two macro-groups?
Answer: Macro-East Sudanic and Macro-Central Sudanic
Explanation: Georgiy Starostin's 2017 'Macro-Sudanic' proposal suggests a genetic link between Macro-East Sudanic and Macro-Central Sudanic.
Blench's 2023 model suggests the primary split in Nilo-Saharan occurred between Koman-Gumuz and which other group?
Answer: The rest of the Nilo-Saharan languages
Explanation: Blench's 2023 model proposes that the primary divergence within Nilo-Saharan occurred between Koman-Gumuz and the remainder of the Nilo-Saharan languages.
The navbox divisions list 'Central Sudanic' as a major branch, encompassing languages like Nilotic and Surmic.
Answer: False
Explanation: According to the 'Nilo-Saharan branches' navbox, the Eastern Sudanic branch encompasses languages like Nilotic and Surmic, while Central Sudanic includes groups such as Moru-Madi and Bongo-Bagirmi.
In Bender's 2000 classification, which languages were placed *outside* the 'Core Nilo-Saharan' group?
Answer: Songhay and Saharan
Explanation: According to Bender's 2000 classification, languages such as Songhay and Saharan were placed outside the 'Core Nilo-Saharan' group, which included Eastern Sudanic, Koman, Gumuz, and Kadu.
Which major proposed branch of Nilo-Saharan, according to the 'Nilo-Saharan branches' navbox, includes sub-groups like Nilotic, Surmic, and Daju?
Answer: Eastern Sudanic
Explanation: According to the 'Nilo-Saharan branches' navbox, the Eastern Sudanic branch is proposed to include sub-groups such as Nilotic, Surmic, and Daju.
A key proposed characteristic of many Nilo-Saharan languages is a bipartite number system, distinguishing only singular and plural forms.
Answer: False
Explanation: A characteristic feature proposed for many Nilo-Saharan languages is a tripartite number system, which distinguishes singulative, collective, and plurative forms, rather than a bipartite system.
Roger Blench suggests that Proto-Nilo-Saharan may have featured noun classifiers that evolved into modern marking systems.
Answer: True
Explanation: Roger Blench posits that Proto-Nilo-Saharan may have possessed noun classifiers, which subsequently developed into the diverse marking systems observed in contemporary branches of the family.
Roger Blench suggests that typological similarities between Niger-Congo and Nilo-Saharan, such as ATR vowel harmony and labial-velars, might stem from a genetic relationship rather than linguistic contact.
Answer: False
Explanation: Roger Blench suggests that typological similarities between Niger-Congo and Nilo-Saharan, such as ATR vowel harmony and labial-velars, are more likely attributable to linguistic contact than a direct genetic relationship.
Dimmendaal cites a causative prefix (*i-), a deverbal noun prefix (*a-), and personal pronouns like *qa ('I') as stable morphological elements across Nilo-Saharan languages.
Answer: True
Explanation: Dimmendaal identifies several stable morphological elements across Nilo-Saharan languages, including the causative prefix (*i-), the deverbal noun prefix (*a-), and personal pronouns such as *qa for 'I'.
Dimmendaal (2016) highlights verb-initial word order (VSO) as a stable typological feature across Nilo-Saharan languages.
Answer: False
Explanation: Dimmendaal (2016) identifies verb-final word order (SOV or OSV) as a stable typological feature observed across Nilo-Saharan languages, not verb-initial (VSO).
According to Roger Blench, what might be the origin of the tripartite number system found in many Nilo-Saharan languages?
Answer: A noun-classifier system in the protolanguage.
Explanation: Roger Blench suggests that the tripartite number system observed in many Nilo-Saharan languages may have originated from a noun-classifier system present in the protolanguage.
The text suggests that similarities between Nilo-Saharan and Niger-Congo languages, like ATR vowel harmony, might be due to:
Answer: Extensive linguistic contact.
Explanation: Similarities between Nilo-Saharan and Niger-Congo languages, such as ATR vowel harmony, are suggested to stem from extensive linguistic contact rather than a direct genetic relationship.
Which of the following is cited by Dimmendaal as a stable morphological element across Nilo-Saharan languages?
Answer: A causative prefix *i-
Explanation: Dimmendaal cites the causative prefix (*i-) as one of several stable morphological elements found across Nilo-Saharan languages.
According to Dimmendaal (2016), which word order is a stable typological feature across Nilo-Saharan languages?
Answer: Verb-final (SOV or OSV)
Explanation: Dimmendaal (2016) identifies verb-final word order, specifically SOV or OSV, as a stable typological feature observed across Nilo-Saharan languages.
What does the comparative vocabulary table, mentioned in the source, aim to achieve?
Answer: Identify potential cognates across Nilo-Saharan branches.
Explanation: The comparative vocabulary table is utilized by linguists to identify potential cognates across various Nilo-Saharan branches, aiding in the reconstruction of the proto-language.
Critics have characterized the Nilo-Saharan proposal as a 'wastebasket taxon' due to its inclusion of languages possessing well-established, distinct genetic affiliations.
Answer: False
Explanation: The criticism of the Nilo-Saharan proposal as a 'wastebasket taxon' stems from its perceived role in grouping languages that do not fit into other major families, rather than from including languages with already established affiliations.
Glottolog 4.0 (2019) recognizes the genetic unity of most proposed Nilo-Saharan branches, including Nilotic, Saharan, and Koman.
Answer: False
Explanation: Glottolog 4.0 (2019) does not recognize the genetic unity of many proposed Nilo-Saharan branches, including Nilotic, Saharan, and Koman, indicating skepticism about the family's overall coherence.
Which criticism is commonly leveled against the Nilo-Saharan classification according to the provided text?
Answer: It is considered a 'wastebasket taxon' for languages that don't fit elsewhere.
Explanation: A common criticism is that the Nilo-Saharan classification functions as a 'wastebasket taxon,' grouping languages that do not readily fit into other established families.
Glottolog 4.0 (2019) expressed skepticism regarding the relatedness of which major proposed Nilo-Saharan branches?
Answer: All of the above
Explanation: Glottolog 4.0 (2019) expresses skepticism regarding the relatedness of numerous proposed Nilo-Saharan branches, including Central Sudanic, Nilotic, and Koman, among others.
The Kanuri language is primarily spoken in South Sudan, and it is the major language of the ethnic group living around Lake Chad.
Answer: False
Explanation: The Kanuri language is primarily associated with the ethnic group living around Lake Chad, not South Sudan.
Old Nubian is considered the earliest written language associated with the Nilo-Saharan family, dating from the 8th to 15th century AD.
Answer: True
Explanation: Old Nubian is identified as the earliest attested written language linked to the Nilo-Saharan family, with records dating from the 8th to the 15th century AD.
The inclusion of Kadu languages within the Nilo-Saharan family is universally accepted and considered uncontroversial by linguists.
Answer: False
Explanation: The classification of Kadu languages within the Nilo-Saharan family is considered controversial and remains debated among linguists.
The Shabo language is consistently classified as Nilo-Saharan by all linguists, with its position within the family being well-defined.
Answer: False
Explanation: The classification of the Shabo language within Nilo-Saharan is not consistent; while some linguists consider it Nilo-Saharan, others classify it as a language isolate due to insufficient data or differing interpretations.
The Meroitic language of ancient Kush is definitively classified as Nilo-Saharan by most scholars, despite limited attestation.
Answer: False
Explanation: The classification of the Meroitic language remains debated, with some scholars arguing for a Nilo-Saharan affiliation and others for an Afroasiatic affiliation, compounded by limited attestation.
The Dinka language is noted for its significance primarily in which region?
Answer: South Sudan
Explanation: The Dinka language is spoken by approximately 1.4 million people and represents the major ethnic group of South Sudan, highlighting its demographic importance in that region.
What is Old Nubian significant for in the context of Nilo-Saharan languages?
Answer: It represents the earliest known written language associated with the family.
Explanation: Old Nubian is significant as the earliest attested written language linked to the Nilo-Saharan family, with written records dating from the 8th to the 15th century AD.
What is the status of the Shabo language's classification within Nilo-Saharan, according to the source?
Answer: It is considered a language isolate by some linguists.
Explanation: The classification of the Shabo language is debated; while some consider it Nilo-Saharan, others classify it as a language isolate due to insufficient data or differing interpretations.
The debate surrounding the Meroitic language's affiliation centers on whether it belongs to:
Answer: Nilo-Saharan or Afroasiatic.
Explanation: The affiliation of the Meroitic language is debated, with scholars proposing either a Nilo-Saharan or an Afroasiatic classification.