Abstract

This research entitled ‘A comparative study of greeting in Kenyang and Ejagham’ aims at comparing greetings in both languages. To archive these aims we identify the various forms of greetings in these languages and then compared them.

Also, we looked at the social significance of each form of greeting in the two languages. The data used for this work included both primary and secondary data. The primary method includes the elicitation of various peach forms from English through the monolingual approach with English as an intermediate language.

The secondary method involves the use of written sources and the internet. The data collected was later analyzed and the ethnography of speaking serves as a framework for the analysis. As findings, it was discovered that both speech forms have periodic and festive greetings. However, the individuals responsible for uttering a particular form of greeting vary. Also, while the periodic greetings of Kenyang consist of two Morphemes, those of Ejagham consist of one morpheme.

CHAPTER ONE

GENERAL INTRODUCTION

1.1Introduction

This research aims at comparing greeting forms in Kenyang and Ejagham. Austin (1970) says greeting is regarded as a kind of performative concern or behavior towards each other to exhibit attitudes and behavior.

This means that greetings are used to show attitudes and behaviors. Greetings can be done politely or impolitely based on the individuals concerned. Human languages being a fundamental principle of every linguistic community, a study on greetings, which is crucial for socialization is important. In this work, we will focus our attention on two basic forms of greetings in both kenyang and Ejagham languages respectively.

They are; phrasal greetings and sentential greetings in which phrasal greetings will talk about different greetings of the day while sentential greetings will talk about general greetings which are mostly formal.

By so doing, we will look at the lexical, structural, and semantic differences amongst these forms of greetings without leaving out their social implications. To achieve this aim, we will use both primary and secondary methods of data collection; the Primary method entails the collection of raw data from language consultants, and the second method entails the collection of already analyzed and published data both on the internet and in books.

This chapter serves as a general introduction to the research entitled „A comparative analysis of greetings in Kenyang and Ejagham‟. This study looks at the various forms of greetings that exist in both Kenyang and Ejagham and describes how different they are from each other. Considering the fact that both languages belong to the same family, we shall glance through the morphology of the two languages since it will enable us to discuss the various forms of greetings in both languages.

The objective of this study is to analyze the form that greetings take in the Kenyang and Ejagham language which can also be referred to as the social interaction in Kenyang and Ejagham. This general introduction provides background knowledge of the languages under study.

This is important since it will help us to know what has been done by other authors and set a scene for this study. This chapter accomplishes the following: Section 1.1 which gives a general introduction, 1.2 which shows the background to study, Subsection 1.2.1 which throws light on the historical background, Subsection 1.2.2 geographical background, Subsection 1.2.3 socio-economic background, Section 1.3 linguistic classification, Section 1.4 literature review, Section 1.5 Theoretical framework, Section 1.6 Methodology, Subsection 1.6.1 methods of data collection, Subsection 1.6.2 instruments of data collection, Subsection 1.6.3. informants, Section 1.7 Aims and objectives, Section 1.8 scope of work/delimitation, and Section 1.9 which gives a general conclusion to the entire chapter. To ease understanding, since are comparing Kenyang and Ejagham, we will examine the two languages simultaneously in this chapter.

1.2 Background to study

1.2.1 Historical Background

The history of Kenyang was not quite clear. According to oral sources, some Kenyang speakers originated from Keaka in the East of Eyumojock and settled in the upper bayang region. Migrants from other tribes like the Kifuni (Balong people) and Mundoni (Bangwa) settled in Manyu as a result of tribal wars and trade attractions making the bayang society a mixture of migrants and indigenes. In 1935/1936, Itmann, a German missionary analyzed Kenyang grammar and phonology.

On the other hand, the Ejagham language, also known as Ekoi, is an Ekoid language of Nigeria and Cameroon spoken by the Ekoi people. The E- in Ejagham represents the class prefix for “language”, analogous to the Bantu Ki-in Kiswahili. Ekoi is dialectally diverse. The Ekoi have lived closely with the nearby Efik and are traditionally organized into 7 clans. Annang , Ibibio, and Igbo people of Southeastern Nigeria. The Ekoi people believe that the heirs of the first settlers of their present settlement own the land.

1.2.2 Geographical background

Kenyang is the most spoken language of the Mamfe language group. It is spoken in the Manyu and Meme sub-divisions of the Southwest Region of Cameroon. Kenyang speakers in Cameroon are known as Bayangui people and are called Bayangi. Kenyang has total native speakers of about 65,000 as was estimated in 1992. The natives call themselves Manyang. They occupy 53 villages in the Mamfe central Sub-Division and the upper Banyang Sub-division.

On the other hand, the Ejagham language is an Ekoid language of Nigeria and Cameroon spoken by the Ekoi people. Statistics have shown that Ejagham has a total native speaker of about 120,000 (2000). It falls under the Niger-Congo language family. The Ekoi in Nigeria are found in Cross River- State. In Cameroon, the Ejaghams are found in the southwestern region of the country. In the Ejagham community, we also find the use of the English language as seen in Blench (2019).

1.2.3 The Socio-Economic Background

The Kenyang speakers are known as the bayangyi, banyang and baying. The natives are however referred to as the manyang (Mbuagbaw,1998). Population statics from the Mamfe rural council (1987) estimates the speakers to be about 60.628, occupying a total of 53 villages in Mamfe central. A majority of the native population are subsistence farmers, who grow food crops like; cocoyam, maize, cassava, melon, plantains, and beans just to name a few alongside cash crops like; cocoa and coffee.

On the other hand, Ejagham is an Ekoid Bantu language spoken by the Bayangi people who share a close boundary with Nigeria. According to Grimes (2005), Ejagham speakers sum up to about “60,000 to 70,000 speakers in (South East) Nigeria and 45,000 to 50,000 in (South West) Cameroon. Ejagham villages are built near rivers or streams. Around the village are crops and beyond that lays forests.

The people are involved in subsistence farming which includes food crops like; grains, corn, sweet potato, cassava, banana, and other vegetables. They also involve in protein-lipid sources like; fish, buffalo, pythons, and crocodiles. Neither men nor women are allowed to feed on scavenger birds like vultures; the kingfisher bird is also a forbidden food. All the above information’s are present in Blench (2019).

1.3 Linguistic classification

Kenyang and Ejagham are both languages belonging to the big Niger-Kordefanian language which has four main families; the Niger-Congo, Nilo-Saharan, Afro- Asiatic and Khoisan languages of which languages from the first three are present in Cameroon. Kenyang and Ejagham classification in descending order is as follows; Niger Congo family, Volta congo; sub-branch of Atlantic Congo branch, Benue Congo family, Bantoid group. The whole of Kenyang belongs to the Northern Bantoid sub-group and Ejagham is of the Southern Bantoid family.

1.4 Literature Review

Much work has already been done to enhance the Kenyang and Ejagham languages, although very little has been done on the greeting forms in these languages in different context.

Mbuagbaw (1998) in “Kenyang orthography” examines the socio-economic situation of Kenyang. Mbuagbaw .T. and Denis Punches (1990) in “Kenyang orthography” (Glottolog) also examined the morphological processes that take place in the kenyang language.

Furthermore, Mbuagbaw (2000) in “Phonological description of Kenyang” outlines the various consonants present in the Kenyang language. Tyhurst (1983) in “Sociolinguistics study of Kenyang” also worked on the sound system of the kenyang language.

In addition, Tanyi E. Mbuagbaw, (1998) in “Kenyang lexicon” examines the various words that exist in the Kenyang language including borrowed ones.                                                                                 Tyhurst (1983) also carried out a “Sociolinguistics study of Kenyang and Denya” and there are other works done by students of the University of Buea.

Lastly, the most prominent writer on Ejagham; John WATTERS (1981), has written articles on the phonology and morphology of Ejagham. The latter has also collected and translated some folk tales in the Ejagham language. He has translated the New Testament of the Bible into Ejagham language as well.

The present study will focus on the greeting forms in both languages.

1.5 Theoretical framework

This study, being sociolinguistic research, uses a sociolinguistic framework, precisely the ethnography of speaking by Hymes (1962). This framework seeks to study language to see how people interact, to understand exactly how communication takes place within the wider context of the social and cultural practices and beliefs of the members of a particular culture. Socialization being the key to communication, the way of greeting determines how the communication will look like. And since our study is focused on greetings in two different cultures, it will enable a better understanding of greetings, letting us know when and with whom a greeting form is used or should be used and by whom.

The pragmatic approach was also used since some greetings were used in particular contexts transmitting a unique, message which needs context to understand and interpret.

Lastly, the comparative method was used. This work is a contrastive study and we are comparing greetings, as such, a comparative method is important. This is because a comparative method serves to perform a feature by feature comparison of 2 or more languages and here it is greetings features of Kenyang and Ejagham

1.6 Methodology

As defined by scholars of the University of Witwatersrand (2021), a methodology is the specific procedure or techniques used to identify, select, process, and analyze information about a topic. A good methodology should be replicable. In this section of methodology, we will talk about the methods of data collection, an instrument of data collection, and the informants.

1.6.1Methods of data collection

For the purpose of this study, we used the Primary method. The data was collected using the translational equivalent elicitation method of data collection in order to collect forms of greetings in Kenyang and Ejagham and English as the intermediary language, thereby, adopting the monolingual approach to data collection. To come up with the forms of greetings, I asked the informants the following questions:

How do you greet elderly persons? how do you say good morning, good afternoon, good evening, and good night?, how do you greet someone after a long period of not seeing the person? what response is attached to each greeting?. As such, the data was controlled.

I equally made use of the secondary method of data collection where I used materials from Frank Hamilton ph.D; which talks about a general overview of the Kenyang language by Hamilton Ayuk (March 27th, 2013), Kenyang orthography guide by Tanyi Eyong Mbuagbaw ( CABTAL, 1999), Ejagham Bakume by Magdaline Bakume Nkongho Ojong, Chimiraa:https//www.pinterest.com (June 8th 2020) and many others.

1.6.2 Instruments of data collection

The instruments for data collection included a wordlist consisting of various greetings that exist in English; which was later elicited in both languages. An android phone was used in recording the voice notes which I listened to over and over before transcribing, I also used a pen, a pencil, and a notebook to jot down points.

1.6.3 Informants

I made use of 4 consultants. The elderly were selected because they have a better mastery of the language. Since this study is a sociolinguistic one, it needed someone who does not just know the language but has competence or a better mastery of it, reasons why I chose my consultants with respect to their ages because those who are advanced in age will have a far more concrete information to give.

As a native of Kenyang, with not 100% competence in the language and also that I am not a native speaker of Ejagham, I needed more natives to better understand the variation in forms of greetings and the social significance attached to them. I made use of 4 consultants. The elderly were selected because they have a better mastery of society.

1.7 Aims and objectives

The aim of this research is to bring out the differences that exist in the forms of greetings in Kenyang and Ejagham, the various greetings that exist in the Kenyang and Ejagham language.

To achieve this aim, the research seeks to:

• Identify the forms of greetings in Kenyang and Ejagham.
• Compare these forms of greetings
• Discuss the usage and significance of each greeting.