Wallacea, a Linguistic Area

Schapper, Antoinette

doi:10.4000/archipel.371

Cited by 28 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 82 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…It has been observed for a very long time, by many different scholars (e.g., Grimes, ; Himmelmann, ; Klamer & Ewing, ; Klamer, Reesink, & van Staden, ; Reesink, ; Reesink & Dunn, ; Schapper, ) that some of the salient features of MP languages spoken in the eastern part of Indonesia and in the vicinity of New Guinea must be due to contact with non‐MP (or Papuan) languages. For example, the order “possessor precedes noun” is almost universal in Papuan languages and a major pattern in many MP languages of the Lesser Sundas, Central and South Moluccas, Halmahera and the Cenderawasih Bay, but not in languages of western ISEA .…”

Section: Diversity In Lexicon and Grammarmentioning

confidence: 99%

The dispersal of Austronesian languages in Island South East Asia: Current findings and debates

Klamer

2019

Language and Linguist. Compass

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper reviews the “standard” view of the Austronesian language family tree in connection with the archeological “farming/language dispersal” hypothesis of Neolithic populations moving into Island South East Asia (ISEA) and beyond. It focuses on what is currently known about the dispersal history of the ~650 languages spoken in ISEA (Malaysia, the Philippines, Indonesia, and Timor‐Leste) that belong to the Malayo‐Polynesian branch of Austronesian and points out where the topology of the MP branch is agreed upon and where it is contested. The conclusion is that historical linguistics is currently not in the position to provide information about higher order temporal and spatial relations between speaker groups within ISEA, unlike that which the language/farming dispersal hypothesis suggests. It also reviews some claims that can be heard in support of this hypothesis and concludes (i) that the expansion of MP languages into ISEA was less monolithic than often suggested, but rather that their lexical and structural diversity suggests multiple migrations of different groups, in many different directions, at different points in time; (ii) that the history of MP languages very likely involved long‐term, intense contact in multilingual communities where newcomers and autochthonous people lived together for centuries if not millennia; (iii) that the original populations of Island SE Asia were not (only) hunter–gatherers but had sea‐faring groups and agriculturalists among them; and (iv) that the histories reflected in languages, archeological findings and human genetics do not always converge. Simple macro‐level models like the standard Austronesian tree and the farming/language dispersal hypotheses are unable to catch the linguistic history of ISEA, with its complex geography, human networks, and migrations. To deepen our understanding of this history, the focus is currently shifting from macro‐level hypotheses to more detailed bottom‐up investigations of regional MP language groups and their speakers.

show abstract

Section: Diversity In Lexicon and Grammarmentioning

confidence: 99%

The dispersal of Austronesian languages in Island South East Asia: Current findings and debates

Klamer

2019

Language and Linguist. Compass

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Panel (a) depicts Wallacea as originally defined by Merrill (1924), the ‘reduced’ version that is widely used today (which was introduced by Darlington, 1957), plus the Wallacea linguistics area (e.g. Schapper, 2015). Panel (b) portrays the key lines and area that were proposed in the last decade or so by Kreft and Jetz (2010), Procheş & Ramdhani, 2012, Holt et al (2013) and Rueda et al (2013).…”

Section: Introduction Of a Wallacea‐labelled Transition Zonementioning

confidence: 99%

Alfred R. Wallace's enduring influence on biogeographical studies of theIndo‐Australianarchipelago

Ali

Heaney

2022

Journal of Biogeography

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

To mark A.R. Wallace's 200th birthday, we review the direct and indirect contributions he made to our understanding of the Indo‐Australian Archipelago's biogeography. He is widely known for his field research (1854–1862) and his 1863 boundary line separating the Oriental and Australasian faunal realms (between Bali and Lombok, Borneo and Sulawesi, and the Philippines and the Moluccas). Notably, though, he never accepted Huxley's ‘Wallace Line’ proposal (1868), whose northern part runs between the main Philippine islands and the Palawan Group to the west. Furthermore, in 1910, which was 3 years prior to his demise, he transferred Sulawesi's fauna to the Oriental realm. In 1924, Merrill introduced the ‘Wallacea’ transition zone. Although the label is today widely used to denote a sub‐region within the Indo‐Australian Archipelago between Wallace's 1863 line and Lydekker's 1896 line (first presented by Darlington in 1957), the western boundary was originally based on Huxley's line, and thus included the Philippine islands minus the Palawan group. Most biogeographers appear to be unaware of Merrill and his intention. Finally, recent attempts to define the faunal break have not led to a consensus view, despite the huge increase in primary data plus the application of modern analytical techniques. This reflects the complexities and diversity of the region's faunal distribution patterns, plus the differences in the ways that researchers choose to process their data.

show abstract

“…According to Barnes (1987: 219) "The Sultan of Ternate also claimed Solor as a dependency during at least part of the sixteenth century and later, and the various sengaji of Solor and Adonara repeatedly acknowledged this tie throughout the first century or more of European contact." In addition to political-economic domination, also cultural interactions and linguistic relationships were established between these islands, coastal Sulawesi, and Ternate (Schapper 2015;Yampolsky 2015).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Historical Paths of Sahu Ceremonial Textiles

Visser¹

2019

archipel

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The people of the eastern Indonesian island of Halmahera do not have a weaving history. Only the Sahu make a conscious selection of foreign textiles, colours, patterns, and motifs for ceremonial purposes. They brought home from Ternate handwoven sarongs made on or traded to Ternate from Sulawesi. Particularly interesting are an indigo-and-red ikat and a yellow- and-red handwoven cloth associated with the domain of Kolincucu on the island of Wolio/Buton. The Sahu chose for their ceremonial textiles the geometric patterns of the handwoven cloths, and blended them with embroidered scarfs and additional non-geometric motifs resembling those found on barkcloth and plaited mats, especially in northeast Halmahera. Written sources and museum collections from other Sulawesi and Moluccan societies/cultures are testament to unique historical paths of more than 150 years shaping Sahu cultural continuity and material change, until today.

show abstract

Wallacea, a Linguistic Area

Cited by 28 publications

References 82 publications

The dispersal of Austronesian languages in Island South East Asia: Current findings and debates

The dispersal of Austronesian languages in Island South East Asia: Current findings and debates

Alfred R. Wallace's enduring influence on biogeographical studies of theIndo‐Australianarchipelago

The Historical Paths of Sahu Ceremonial Textiles

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About