Goldfields Aboriginal Language Centre

Marlpa

Following the discovery of a Marlpa speaker at Esperance, and subsequent language work undertaken by Goldfields Aboriginal Language Centre Aboriginal Corporation (GALCAC) linguists, the following document aims to produce a preliminary analysis of Marlpa.  In particular, Marlpa’s relationship to Mirniny and Ngadju and preliminary placement within a language family.

Marlpa people sociolinguistically distinguish themselves from neighbouring groups, and many feel the language to be different to Mirniny and Ngadju.  Despite this, historical linguistic analysis places Marlpa (AIATSIS code A110) within Ngadjumaya (AIATSIS code A3), or what is known today as Ngadju (Thieberger, 1993). 

Carl George von Brandenstein described the location of Marlpa country as rock holes and soaks around Balladonia, north to the Kopai Cliffs and south to Israelite Bay (Australian Institute of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Studies [AIATSIS] n.d.).  Ngadjumaya country being described as south of Goddard Creek to Mount Ragged, Israelite Bay and Point Malcolm.  The Fraser Ranges marking the western boundary and east to near Point Culver, at Mount Andrew and Balladonia (Australian Institute of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Studies [AIATSIS] n.d.).  Balladonia has since been determined under Ngadju native title in 2014.   

These three codes; Marlpa, Mirniny and Ngadju, share lexical similarity and geographical proximity, with an historical classification of Dundas Region Dialects (along with Kaalamaya).  Members of these groups have indicated to GALC that this label does not match the way they identify and thus, GALC linguists avoid using this term.  However, work continues to place these codes within a language family. 

The small sample below is taken from (non-aboriginal) Marlpa speakers living on and around Balladonia Station from the mid to late 20th Century.  The Marlpa informant lived on Balladonia Station from 1941 until 2001.  Ideally, language work is done with aboriginal language speakers, however; as GALC linguists were unable to locate aboriginal speakers, the initial study has been undertaken with the assistance of non-aboriginal speakers.

Modified Swadesh Lexical Comparison

#

 

Marlpa

 

Pitjantjatjarra

Mirniny

Ngadju

Gloss

1

nyuntu

nyuntu

ngurntu

nguntu

2sg

2

 

 

ngatju

(possibly )

gnudda

wati

mirniny

mirniny

man

3

paarti

lunki

paarti

parti

grub

4

kuntala

wana

 

kantala

 

karntula

stick used for digging rabbits

5

ngarnu

mintju

mirnu

kunapirti

wattle tree

non-specific species

6

pulka

 

paru

 

pilkarra

sandlewood

7

pinyar

tjukutjuku

mungan

kaja

small

8

Balladonia

Palatunya

Balladonia

place name

9

putja

ngula

putja

purta

later, by and by

10

walyi

kurra

walyi

walyi

no good.

11

pinjal

kilipi

pintjal

pirntil

star

12

tjunginta

munga

tjungin

jungin

night

13

yakin

pira

yakin

yakun

moon

14

jintu

tjirntu

jintu

jirntu

sun

15

parna

ulpuru

purlpa

pirra

dust

16

mijal

kapi

 

warlpi

 

kapi

water

17

manjali

mai

ngamu

manjali

food

18

nanjil

kuka

tjuwi

juru

meat

19

tampuri  

mangarta

kurti

tampuri

quandong

20

 

yurlka

ul’ga

yurlka

yurlka

 

grass

non-specific

21

tjungka

marru

ngurpi 

jungin

dark

22

 

miran

meran

urru

pirlaya

wangara

sea

23

 

puri

borrie

apu

purtangu

puri

rock or rocks

24

 

tanku

tonko

kurturtu

kurturtu

kurturtu

heart

25

ngarlti

alu

ngarlti

ngalji

liver

26

 

ngarnkurr

nangar

ngarnkurrpa

ngarnkurr

ngarnkurr

whiskers/

beard

27

 

julit

jo’lid

tjarlinypa

tjaalany

jalany

tongue

28

jinka

mamu

 

miringu

meringoo 

jinka

devil

29

wanti

tjitji nyirtayira

wanti

wanti

boy

30

wanya

akuri

wanya

wanya

girl

31

wanya katja

akuri tjukutjuku

wanya purtu

wanya kaja

girl small

32

katja

kurlunypa

purtu

kaja

small person

33

ngunga

minyma

yaka

yaka

woman

34

nurnti

wipu

nurnti

ngunti

 

tail

(of an animal)

35

kata

kata

parlka

wiyuntu

head

36

mula

mulya

mula

mula

nose

37

 

kuliya

goulla

pina

kuliya

pinta

ear

38

mara

mara

mara

mara

hand

39

jina

tjina

jina

jina

foot

40

tjutju

papa

tjutju

juju

dog

41

kampu

tjarna

kampu

kampu

back

42

kampirti

tjuni

kampirti

kampirti

belly

43

warta

kuru

wartu

wartu

eye

44

wamu

ngurra

wamu

wamu

home or camp

45

puyu

puyu

puya

puyu

smoke

46

kaarla

waru

kaarla

karla

 

fire

 

47

kakarra

kakararra

kakarra

kakarra

east

48

 

 

jita

jidda

 

tjurlpu

jirta

jirta

 

 Willy Wagtail. 

(bird)

49

yarta

warlawuru

yarta

yarta

wedge tail eagle

50

 

ngawu

gnows

ngarnamara

marnamara

warntu

mallee hen

51

yuuna

younar

kalka

kailga

kalka

(short-tail)

bobtail goanna

52

kalka

kalgar

kalka

kailga

kaaluny

longtail goanna

53

 

kalwinj

kalwindge

mirlparli

jalpu

kurlanj

goanna

54

 

kuulpi

koul’bee

kulpirpa

 

kulpirr

 

kulpirr

grey roo

55

marlu

marlu

marlu

marlu

red roo

56

 

pikurta

bicquita

pikurta

pikurta

wallaby

57

minta

marnngu

minta

pirti

bird’s nest

58

tjuri

thorie

parnta

banda

parnta

penis 

59

kulya

goolya

pimpu

bimbu

kulya

vagina

60

 

pitji

bidgee

tjukurla

purtangu mirra

jukurlu

rockhole

61

 

kuyal

kooyal

purnu

warta

jirin

tree

62

 

ngura

gnura

kirripitji

 

ngura

 

ngura

native grapes

63

‘orse

nyanytju

panyjin

puni

horse

64

wirlpa

rapita

wilpa

wirlpa

rabbit

*Items in italics represent the speaker’s orthography.

Items in bold are word final suffixes.

Boxes marked – represent no data available.

 

Table One; exact match.

 

Marlpa

Pitjantjatjarra

Mirniny

Ngadju

Marlpa

 

10.71%

6/56

43.31%

29/64

40.63%

26/64

Pitjantjatjarra

10.71%

6/56

 

7.14%

4/56

10.71%

6/56

Mirniny

43.31%

29/64

7.14%

4/56

 

37.50%

24/64

Ngadju

40.63%

26/64

10.71%

6/56

37.50%

24/64

 

The first table shows the percentage of exact matches between Marlpa and other languages.  Mirniny has the highest correlation with Marlpa at 43.31%.

  1. Marlpa and Mirniny 43.31%
  2. Marlpa and Ngadju 40.63%
  3. Marlpa and Pitjantjatjarra 71%

The figure between Marlpa and Pitjantjatjarra has been negatively affected by the gap in lexemes available, 56 compared to the 64 found for Marlpa, Mirniny and Ngadju. 

Table Two; one phoneme difference.

 

 

Marlpa

Pitjantjatjarra

Mirniny

Ngadju

Marlpa

 

12.29%%

8/56

53.13%

34/64

57.81%

37/64

Pitjantjatjarra

12.29%

8/56

 

12.29%

8/56

19.64%

11/56

Mirniny

53.13%

34/64

12.29%

8/56

 

54.69%

35/64

Ngadju

57.81%

37/64

19.64%%

11/56

54.69%

35/64

 

The second table shows the percentage of matches with one phoneme’s difference between Marlpa and other languages. 

Marlpa and Ngadju returned the highest correlating percentage.  

  1. Marlpa and Ngadju 57.81%
  2. Marlpa and Mirniny 53.13%
  3. Marlpa and Pitjantjatjarra 12.29%

Again, resulting percentages from Pitjantjatjarra are lower than Marlpa/Mirniny/Ngadju figures, which affects the results of the test.  This should be taken into account. 

The missing lexemes have not made an impact on this comparison.  Statistically speaking, another eight lexemes would only yield one more match, thus bringing the total to 12% (12/64).  Using these calculations, the change in percentage values would be negligible. 

Marlpa Results.

Lexical comparison tests require a minimum 65% correlation between lexemes to demonstrate a familial relationship.  A Swadesh is completed with 100 lexemes.  This test is a preliminary comparison between Marlpa and neighbouring codes, Mirniny and Marlpa.  Pitjantjatjarra, from the Wati language family, has been included for familial comparison, and because it is a strong, widely spoken language in the Goldfields. 

Marlpa and Ngadju returned the highest score of 57.81%, which falls short of the obligatory 65%.  This figure is high enough to suggest that rather than being a separate language, Marlpa is in a dialectal relationship with Ngadju.  This may also be referred to as a communilect; a code used by communities living in close proximity, that are mutually intelligible.  There are a significant number of lexemes in this test whose orthography is different, but are effectively similar enough to be pronounced with minimal difference.  Often these differences can be explained by transcriber error, that is a non-native speaker mis-hearing phonemes they are unfamiliar with.  This may be especially true of Marlpa examples, given the data was provided by a non-indigenous L2 speaker of a language of which there are no remaining speakers. 

  • 2SG pronoun ‘you’ nyuntu/ngurntu/nguntu.
  • ‘grub’ paarti/paarti/parti
  • liver’ ngarlti/ngarlti/ngalji
  • ‘later’ putja/putja/purta
  • tail’ nurnti/nurnti/ngunti
  • smoke’ puyu/puya/puyu
  • bird’ jita/jirta/jirta
  • rabbit’ wirlpa/wilpa/wirlpa
  • ‘grey kangaroo’ kuulpi/kulpirr/kulpirr

Some examples provided by the Marlpa speaker were vague, or too general to result in exact matches.  This meant non-specific items such as ‘inland snake’ and ‘tiger snake’ were left out of the analysis.  In the same manner, descriptions such as ‘bobtail goanna’ and ‘long tail goanna’ may have returned incorrect samples, because data contained in Mirniny and Ngadju toolboxes are more specific, often using scientific names rather than colloquial or informal terms like those provided by the Marlpa speaker. 

  • ‘bobtail goanna’: yuuna (Marlpa example) – ‘bobtail lizard’: kalka/kalka
  • ‘longtail goanna’: kalka (Marlpa) – kalka/kaaluny
  • ‘goanna’: kalwinj/jalpu/kurlanj
  • ‘wattle tree’: ngarnu/mirnu/kunapirti
  • ‘South Australian sandlewood’: pulka

The analysis found two examples used in Marlpa, that have been borrowed from the Western Desert (Wati). 

  • ‘head’ kata
  • ‘woman’ ngunga

Similarity, or borrowing between languages that share a border, or are close in proximity is not uncommon.  It is worthwhile noting that Wati languages are classified as a separate language family from Marlpa.  As for Marlpa, its language family is yet to be determined. 

The small number of similarities between Marlpa and Pitjantjatjarra lexemes has already been established.  There were also a number of differences observed as a result of the lexical comparison.

For example,

  • ‘beard’ ngarnkurr and ngarnkurrpa are the same in both Marlpa and Pitjantjatjarra, with the exception of the –pa We know that Pitjantjatjarra was a vowel-final rule (words must end in a vowel) meaning the -pa suffix is added to words that would otherwise end with a consonant.  Because the –pa suffix is absent from the Marlpa example, we can say there is no vowel-final rule in Marlpa.  This places it closer to Mirniny and Ngadju in terms of familial relationship.
  • Other consonant-final examples such as: ‘star’ pinjal; ‘moon’ yakin; ‘water’ mijal, and ‘tree’ kuyal, act to provide further evidence towards the absence of word final rules in Marlpa.
  • The analysis includes several examples of the Pitjantjatjarra lexeme being ‘the odd one out’. That is to say, when Marlpa, Miriny and Ngadju words are clearly related (similar) the Pitjantjatjarra example is obviously quite different.  For example: ‘digging stick’ kuntala/wana/kuntala/karntula; ‘no good’ walyi/kurra/walyi/walyi; ‘star’ pinjal/kilipi/pintjal/pirntil; ‘moon’ yakin/pira/yakin/yakun, and ‘eye’ warta/kuru/wartu/wartu.  This pattern supports the concept that Marlpa and Pitjantjatjarra are from different language families.  Based on the lexical comparison, Marlpa is more closely placed to Mirniny and Ngadju than the Western Desert Pitjantjatjarra. 

 

Conclusion.

This analysis is a preliminary investigation into similarities between Marlpa and its neighbouring codes, Mirniny and Ngadju.  Speakers of Marlpa maintain their code to be distinct from others in the region, even though this is contrary to the findings of historical linguistic work, which suggests Marlpa to be a dialect of Ngatjumaya, or modern-day Ngadju.  Given that the traditional lands of Marlpa, Mirniny and Ngadju are co-located, significant cross over between these three codes is to be expected.  The extent of this cross-over and what it means for the status of Marlpa (be it language, dialect or communilect with neighbouring languages) is the aim of this comparison. 

Results from the lexical analysis showed commonalities of less than 65%.  That figure is lower than what is required to demonstrate a familial relationship.  However, because only a small number of lexemes were gathered in the first session, only a small selection was analysed.  Initial testing was promising and further testing is clearly needed. 

Comparison between Marlpa and Pitjantjatjarra resulted in very few matches, in both tests.  Pitjantjatjarra is a Western Desert (Wati) language; a language family that has different features to the (previously known as) Dundas Region Dialect.  Figures of between 10-12% were not unexpected.  Linguists used these differences to better understand the Marlpa code.

Even though similarities between Marlpa, Mirniny and Ngadju were less than anticipated, the evidence confirms that Marlpa is in a communilect relationship with

Mirniny and Ngadju.  Further analysis is required to learn more about Marlpa; its relationship with other codes in the region and a language family.  GALC linguists will continue to work with the Marlpa informant with the aim of collecting more data for this purpose. 

 

References

Australian Institute for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Studies (AIATSIS).  (n.d.).  AIATSIS Collection. Retrieved from https://collection.aiatsis.gov.au/austlang/search

 

Coffin, J., Reynolds, T. & Hanson, S. (n.d.). Mirniny Dictionary, Goldfields Aboriginal Language Centre, Kalgoorlie: Australia.

 

Goddard, C. (1996). Pitjantjatjara/ Yankunyjatjara to English Dictionary, IAD Press, Alice Springs: Australia.

 

Milonas, G. & Hanson, S. (n.d.). Ngadju Dictionary, Goldfields Aboriginal Language Centre, Kalgoorlie: Australia.

 

Thieberger, N. (1993).  Handbook of Western Australian Aboriginal Languages South of the Kimberley Region. Canberra, Australia: Pacific Linguistics.