Classification Bantu languages

the approximate locations of sixteen guthrie bantu zones, including addition of zone j around great lakes. jarawan languages spoken in nigeria.

the used classification alphanumeric coding system developed malcolm guthrie in 1948 classification of bantu languages. geographic. term narrow bantu coined benue–congo working group distinguish bantu recognized guthrie, bantoid languages not recognized bantu guthrie.

in recent times, distinctiveness of narrow bantu opposed other southern bantoid languages has been called doubt (cf. piron 1995, williamson & blench 2000, blench 2011), term still used. coherent classification of narrow bantu need exclude many of zone , perhaps zone b languages.

there no true genealogical classification of (narrow) bantu languages. until attempted classifications considered languages happen fall within traditional narrow bantu, there seems continuum related languages of south bantoid.

at broader level, family commonly split in 2 depending on reflexes of proto-bantu tone patterns: many bantuists group parts of zones through d (the extent depending on author) northwest bantu or forest bantu, , remainder central bantu or savanna bantu. 2 groups have been described having mirror-image tone systems: northwest bantu has high tone in cognate, central bantu languages have low tone, , vice versa.

northwest bantu more divergent internally central bantu, , perhaps less conservative due contact non-bantu niger–congo languages; central bantu innovative line cladistically. northwest bantu not coherent family, central bantu evidence lexical, little evidence historically valid group.

another attempt @ detailed genetic classification replace guthrie system 1999 tervuren proposal of bastin, coupez, , mann. however, relies on lexicostatistics, which, because of reliance on similarity rather shared innovations, may predict spurious groups of conservative languages not closely related. meanwhile, ethnologue has added languages guthrie classification guthrie overlooked, while removing mbam languages (much of zone a), , shifting languages between groups (much of zones d , e new zone j, example, , part of zone l k, , part of m f) in apparent effort @ semi-genetic, or @ least semi-areal, classification. has been criticized sowing confusion in 1 of few unambiguous ways distinguish bantu languages. nurse & philippson (2006) evaluate many proposals low-level groups of bantu languages, result not complete portrayal of family. glottolog has incorporated many of these classification.

the languages share dahl s law may form valid group, northeast bantu. infobox @ right lists these various low-level groups uncontroversial, though continue revised. development of rigorous genealogical classification of many branches of niger–congo, not bantu, hampered insufficient data.