The linguistic setting

I turn now from the social and historical contexts of Lewo to more linguistic factors, and consider first the extent to which other languages constitute part of the world of Lewo-speakers (§2.2.1). Next I note the role of the national and official languages of Vanuatu (§2.2.2), and the significance of other nearby languages (§2.2.3). The place given to Lewo in various surveys of the language situation on Epi is detailed (§2.2.4), but I discuss previous linguistic studies on Lewo, or those that incorporate Lewo material, later, in §2.3, along with Lewo’s genetic relationships, in §2.4.

2.2.1. Multilingualism in Vanuatu

Vanuatu is well known for the very complex linguistic situation that is found there. It is recognised that there is no other highly multilingual country in the world that has the same density of different languages to population.24 Capell’s listing (1962:234-240) recorded 99 indigenous

23 There are some records from missionaries and missionary observers of the day (detailed by Miller 1987:385), such as the account by Riddle of his residence on Epi from 1903-1911 (Riddle 1949, Chapter 4), Frater’s account, and the booklet Fraser o f Epi (Heyer 1921), but these are generally too brief and anecdotal to count. Graham Horwell has related to me how Thomas Smaill’s papers and diaries were carefully protected by his widow for more than sixty years, only to be taken to the dump by their children after she herself died in 1966.

24 This fact was noted very early, eg. Steel (1880:20): “There is no part of the world where there are so many languages in the same area or among so few people.” This was at a time when it was only known that “(t)here are at least twenty distinct languages on the thirty islands of the New Hebrides”. Steel also noted that many of these distinct languages also show considerable dialectal differentiation. The density of languages in Vanuatu is paralleled very closely by the situation in the Amazon basin, where there are something like 170 languages still spoken by a total Indian population of around 155,000 (Dixon 1993),

Chapter 2 _{The Lewo language and its speakers}

vernacular languages for Vanuatu, and Try on’s initial checklist (Try on 1972) increased this to 110. This was reduced slightly to 105 in the full report of his survey (Tryon 1976), where, amongst other changes, the previously counted Tasiko language was subsumed under Lewo. However, further refinement has seen the number continue to grow. More recently, Crowley (1991:6 fn. 5) gave a figure of 119 languages, six of which are now extinct, leaving 113 living languages, and Try on (1992) has drawn a further language map which lists and locates 113 languages. Other small languages may well continue to be identified in the more complex linguistic areas, and of course all of this is for a total Melanesian population of around 140,000 people.

This high degree of “linguistic speciation” (Pawley 1981:293) is very evident on Epi, as (of the islands with five or more languages today) it is the island with the greatest density of languages to population within Vanuatu.25 The islands of M alakula and Santo certainly have more languages than Epi, which has the next largest number (29, 35, and 6, respectively), but while the average number of speakers per language is 662 for Malakula, and 718 for Santo, it is just 450 for Epi.26

When the presence of the important national language Bislama27 is taken into account, as well as the continuing significance of the colonial metropolitan languages English and French as official languages, it will be seen that Vanuatu has a particularly rich linguistic repertoire. Like all Vanuatu citizens, Lewo speakers live in an environment of considerable language diversity, and are continuously confronted with the implications and demands of this.

and also by the situation in the Sepik region of Papua New Guinea. However, modem linguists unfamiliar with the situation in Melanesia still find it hard to accept this language density pattern: eg. Croft (1990:22) asks sceptically “How do we know ... that the five lects Bierebo, Baki, Mari, Bieria and Lewo on the small island of Epi in Vanuatu, totalling altogether 1,640 speakers, are all distinct languages (as claimed by Wurm and Hattori 1981)?”

25 These facts should not be taken to imply anything about possible “homelands” or centers of dispersal for the languages of the region. The ratio of languages to population is not the same measure as that used by eg. Dyen for “identifying the ... area as a possible homeland for the ... languages”. The home­ land is the “area in which the genetically most diverse members of the family are to be found” (Dyen 197la:38), and it is clear that despite the high density of languages in Vanuatu, and on Epi in particular, the spread of genetic diversity is not great, indicating more recent dispersal and divergence rather than earlier. Pawley considers that Vanuatu material “indicates that the degree of genetic diversity is quite modest, and somewhat less than is found ... in the Solomon Islands” (Pawley 1981:292).

26 This figure was regularised for Epi by subtracting (from the total population of 3626) the 800 or so residents who do not speak Epi languages (see fn. 5). It must be recalled here that language population sizes today reflect the impact of variable depopulation rates. Several other islands have five languages each, but for them the average number of speakers per language is 2260 for Pentecost, 1434 for Ambrym, and 3965 for Tanna.

27 This is a variety of the English-based pidgin/creole often called Neo-Melanesian Pidgin that is spoken throughout Melanesia, and is known as Tok Pisin in Papua New Guinea, and Pijin in Solomon Islands.

2.2.2. Bislama, English and French

Although I have not carried out formal surveys in this area, my assessment is that on Epi today, there are no men, and perhaps only a few middle-aged and older women who do not know Bislama. Bislama is now learnt by all children concurrently with their vernacular, and there are those for whom Bislama is arguably their first, and for some, their only productively active language. As in the rest of Vanuatu, Bislama is virtually the sole donor language (of its own mainly English and French sourced lexicon) for borrowings into the vernaculars. The utility of Bislama as a lingua franca limits the extent to which the societal multilingualism described above translates into multilingualism at the individual level. Many older Lewo speakers speak and use other Epi languages, and languages from adjacent islands, while most younger Lewo speakers know just Lewo and Bislama.

Lagging quite a way behind many other Vanuatu communities, Epi has yet to produce its first university graduate, although in 1992 Lewo-speaking Pastor Willie Oli graduated from the Pacific Theological College (Fiji), with the BD degree granted by that institution. Comparatively few Epi people have attained nationally prominent positions in government or the private sector, and so there are few Epi people, apart from quite a few teachers, for whom English or French have a significant role in their daily professional and social lives. French played an important part in the plantation communities along the west coast of Epi for many decades, but all the French colonial families have been gone for more than a decade, and some remaining half-caste descendants are oriented more towards Bislama than French. It has been noted that both French and English medium primary schools are found on Epi, and one English medium junior secondary school, and while all Epi children have access to the former, few of them attain access to the latter. In the 1992 primary school leaving exams, fewer than 10 Epi students, out of approximately 200 who sat the test, attained sufficiently good marks to continue on to junior secondary education. Overall, Epi people lack facility and confidence in either English or French.

In such a small but highly multilingual community like Epi, there are many very important but extremely complex sociolinguistic issues to be considered. The whole question of linguistic repertoires and multilingualism; communicative strategies; domains of language use; language status, maintenance and viability; and more practical applied linguistic matters like vernacular education and curriculum development; are all concerns needing to be addressed. These matters will be researched over the next couple of years by Jim and Janet Stahl, my SIL colleagues currently resident at Vaemali on Epi.

Chapter 2 The Lewo language and its speakers 2.2.3. Languages adjacent to Epi

The presence of Paamese and Tongoan people, on the north and south of Epi respectively, has been mentioned. Lewo speakers make up both the most northern and the most southern Epi villages, so many of them in these locations, more than other Epi people, will know Paamese and/or Nakanamanga and/or Namakura as additional “second” languages. As already noted, language shift from Lewo to these last two languages is observed in the south.

In the north, it seems clear that the Paamese people living there “need” their Epi hosts, and there is little reciprocal benefit that the Epi people can derive from their association with and sponsoring of Paamese immigrants. Under these circumstances, one would expect that Paamese people would learn and use Lewo in the communities they move into. Surprisingly, the opposite is true: few Paamese people, even long-term residents on Epi, make any attempt to speak Lewo or another Epi language, while many Epi people have a good knowledge of, and freely use, Paamese, including some who have never spent any significant amount of time on Paama. Some Paamese vocabulary and cultural items (eg. songs sung at weddings) are borrowed by Lewo speakers. Paamese people regard Lewo as “difficult” to learn, while Lewo speakers regard Paamese as “easy” to learn.

2.2.4. The language situation on Epi

2.2.4.1. Language surveys

Various surveys have sought to catalogue the languages spoken on Epi, and these will now be reviewed, in chronological order. The earlier ones of the modem era include Ray (1893 and 1926), Miller (1948), Capell (1954, 1962), Hollyman (1960), and Dyen (1971b). In many cases, these surveys simply repackage the information contained in previous studies, and of course all of them have been superseded by Tryon’s study based on field data (Tryon 1973, 1976).

Ray (1893:107-8) listed 7 “dialects” on Epi as belonging to the Epi group within his “Central Division”. These were Tasiko (or Lemaroro), Maluba, Lamenu, Mari, Bieri, Baki, and Bierebo. Within his Efate group, he also included Livara (or Liara) spoken in two villages on Epi, which soon became extinct. For three of these languages (Tasiko, Bieri, and Baki), vocabularies of 122 items were given (see Appendix 3). Thus although Lewo was not known at this time, Tasiko and Maluba would have been dialects of it. By the time of his 1926 study, Ray was able to take advantage of the local knowledge of the missionary Robert Fraser, but the only amendments to his earlier list were the correct spelling of Bieri as Bieria, and the equation of “Laevo or Lewo” with Maluba. In this work Ray went on to give grammatical sketches of Tasiko and Baki.

Miller (1948) listed the four languages in which the earliest missionary translations had been undertaken, namely Lewo, Tasiko, Bieria and Baki. He recognised that Tasiko was a “dialect” of Lewo, and was becoming extinct. Miller also mentioned Maii, and referred to another unnamed language spoken in the bush area behind Revaliu on the west coast. By Miller’s time, the Livara ( = Sesake of Emae) referred to by Ray had become extinct.

Capell’s first listing in 1950 includes Tasiko, Lamenu, Baki, Bieria and Nikaura as both “districts” and “dialects”, and recognises that Tasiko, Nikaura and possibly Lamenu could be united into one language. He also notes that there are other unnamed dialects on Epi.28 The revised 1962 report draws heavily on Miller’s description, and the only addition Capell makes to that is an erroneous one. With regard to mission publications and translation, he says that “nowadays most work is being done in Lamenu” as a dialect of Lewo/Tasiko, but this was not the case. While the mission station was located on Lamen Island, Graham Horwell worked on Bible translation only in Lewo. Although Capell refers to Ray 1926, he does not include the Mari, Bierebo, and Maluba languages mentioned there.

Hollyman (1960) compiles names from the above sources into a composite list, giving nine language names for Epi: Baki, Bierebo, Bieria, Epi, Lamenu, Lewo, Livara, Mari and Tasiko. Epi is clearly a cover term, or the name that was applied when it was thought that there might only be just one Epi language (Hollyman takes this name from an early bibliography by Klieneberger). The two names Mari and Maii are used in different lists, and seem to be equated, although this is not made explicit.

Dyen’s (1971b) listing has eight language varieties noted for Epi, and gives quite a number of alternative names for them. His Api/Epi/Ebi is again a cover term, not applicable to any one particular Epi language. As in previous surveys, he has Baki, Bierebo and Bieria, but includes alternative names Bieri and Bierian for the last. Similarly, Livara is given the alternate Liara, and Lamenu is given alternates North Api and Lamen. Finally, there is Lewo, for which the following list of alternates is given: Eastern Epi, Maluba, Laevo, Hikaura (clearly in error for Nikaura), Tasiko, Tasiko-Lewo, Lemaroro, and Nikaura.

28 Darrell Tryon has copies of some of Capell’s Field notes, and these contain reference to Lelewu (probably = Lewo), Howana (= Bieria?), and Mgir (certainly = Mae Morae, and the preferred name today, as Mkir, for that language) as other “dialects” found on Epi.

Chapter 2 _{The Lewo language and its speakers}

Subsequently, the language situation on Epi (and for Vanuatu as a whole) was charted more accurately by Tryon. His initial checklist of Vanuatu languages (Tryon 1972) listed the following six languages for Epi, and gave some information about them:29

• Lewo Lewo and Lamenu were considered a single speech community, and Lewo’s function as a church language over a wider area of north Epi was noted.

• Bierebo Tryon noted that this language was originally spoken in the interior of the northern part of Epi, and speakers of the language moved to villages on the central western and eastern coast. The village on the east coast, Lokopui (also known as Tavio), is located right in the centre of the Lewo speaking area. Today, the children from this village attend the school at Nikaura, and are all bilingual in Lewo. It is possible that Lewo may completely displace Bierebo in this village.

• Baki This language was spoken in several small villages on the west coast of Epi.

• Maii Another small west coast language.

• Bieria Also small, found in the south-west comer of Epi.

• Tasiko Tryon noted that some writers had considered Tasiko to be a dialect of the same language with Lewo, but concluded that his evidence pointed to it being different enough to be accorded separate language status.

The only update to this presented in Tryon’s 1976 volume is that just five Epi languages are noted, Tasiko, extinct by this stage, having been dropped.

While this broad picture of the languages of Epi is accurate, it is probably not entirely complete. Within the villages currently considered to be Lewo-speaking, there are a number of older people or small families that still retain knowledge of, and sometimes use, language varieties that are considered to be different from Lewo and the other recognised “main” languages. Firstly, in the village of Paia, an unnamed language variety is used which shares a number o f features diagnostic o f the Lamen language (ie. not found in Lewo), such as a sound change t > s, and lexical items like virimi ‘to come' (cf. Lewo vimi), and some diagnostic of Lewo (ie. not found in Lamen), such as wa-mara-u ‘tears’ (cf. Lamen mara-lulu), pogva ‘when’ (cf. Lamen velige), and papel ‘shark’ (cf. Lamen pia). It also contains items different from both, eg. luwe- ‘breast’ (cf. Lamen and Lewo yu), sulapa ‘thumb’ (cf. Lamen merasilma-, Lewo pasu), naneva ‘yesterday’ (cf. Lamen nereva, Lewo nakoneva) etc. Whether it can be regarded as a language

29 Tryon also notes two languages, not classified as members of the subgroup of Epi languages, spoken on Epi. Both of these are spoken by groups of recent immigrants in two separate communities; one is

Laul, the dialect of Paamese from Lopevi Island, and the other is an east Malakulan language. The presence of the former group on the east coast, within the Lewo area, has been noted. Many of their younger Epi-born generation are now receptively bilingual in Lewo.

separate from Lamen or Lewo, or a dialect of either, or as the single intermediate link in a very short chain between Lamenu and Lewo is still to be determined.30

A second example is the modem village of Lokopui, which is made up of remnant populations from three old villages, Puruvanua, Purusam, and Pumpe. Many of these people now use Lewo, but the people from Puruvanua still retain knowledge of their old language, called Ianigi, and those from Pumpe similarly; theirs was called Iakanaga (for both names, g = [rj]).31

These two cases are from within the Lewo area, but similar situations can be described from the other language areas. It is clear that there is still some extant knowledge of a more complex language situation on Epi than has been described to this point, and further work remains to be done in cataloguing this.

2.2.4.2. Lewo and Lamen

In some of the earlier surveys listed above, Lewo and Lamen tended to be regarded as distinct language communities, while in Tryon’s study, they were placed under the one language name. There is no doubt about their very close linguistic relatedness, and their 78% of lexical similarity placed them right at the threshold of Tryon’s language/dialect cut-off point of 81%. However, although lexical similarity is high overall, there is a significant number of the most frequent lexemes that are quite different (eg. Lamen vere, Lewo visa ‘say’-, Lamen sokoroga Lewo taaga ‘one ’), as well as a number of important categories that are marked quite differently both morphologically and structurally, eg. the negative construction. Most younger Lewo and Lamen speakers now use Bislama with each other across this language/dialect boundary, and in our literature production efforts in the Epi-Lamen Translation Project it has become clear that literature in Lewo is no longer acceptable to the modem Lamen community. There are some important cultural differences between the two communities, especially in regard to avoidance relationships (in-law taboos are more rigidly adhered to on Lamen), and in the nature of chieftainship (the tradition of chieftainship seems stronger on Lamen, and there is some evidence of graded titles there [Michael Young, pc.]). There is also continuing tension and antagonism over the use and ownership of the Epi mainland areas around Lamen Bay where all Lamen Island people have their gardens. This combination of linguistic and non-linguistic factors suggests that the communalects of the Lewo and Lamen communities be regarded as separate languages.