According to the Ethnologue, language shift is occurring at Maricopa Colony: "The child-bearing generation can use the language among themselves, but it is not being transmitted to children." At Salt River, it is nearly extinct: "The only remaining users of the language are members of the grandparent generation or older who have little opportunity to use the language.[5]
There are about 100 speakers out of an ethnic population of 800. Salt River's cultural resources department estimates that there are around 15 fluent native speakers remaining in the Salt River community.[6] There are many more with varying degrees of fluency, including many who can understand but not speak Maricopa.
The modern Maricopa people are actually an amalgamation of five separate but related groups, with different dialects. There are now two dialects of Maricopa: Piipaash and Xalychidom. Most Piipaash reside at Maricopa Colony on the Gila River Indian Community, and most Xalychidom reside at Salt River. However, all remaining dialect differences are fairly minor.[4] Xalychidom is the dialect spoken by the formerly distinct Xalychidom people.
There is a language revitalization program at Salt River, the O'odham Piipaash Language Program, offering immersion classes, language-based cultural arts classes, community language-based social activities, and assistance with translation, cultural information and language learning.[7]
Phonology
All claims and examples in this section come from Gordon (1986) unless otherwise noted.
Maricopa has 10 phonemic vowels made up of 5 pairs of corresponding long and short vowels with the cross-linguistically common five-way quality contrast:
There are falling diphthongs that glide from one vowel sound into another.[7] Diphthongs can also be long or short: /ej/ and /eːj/ are both found.
Diphthongs are
/ajaːjejeːjojoːjujuːjawaːweweːw/,
as in kwidui/kwiduj/ and mahai/maxaj/.
Stress and intonation
Stress within a word falls on the final root vowel (they are capitalized):
/XOT-k/ → [ˈxotɪk]
/m-XOT-k/ → [məˈxotɪk]
/XʷET-xot-m/ → [ˈxʷetxotɪm]
Declarative sentences have a falling intonation toward the end of the sentence.
Interrogative sentences have a rising intonation toward the end of the sentence.
Epenthesis
Epenthesis of vowels to relieve consonant clusters is a major and complicated issue in Maricopa. It is not completely understood, but some general statement can be made.
Epenthetic vowels can have the quality of any other vowel as well as some reduced vowel qualities. However, the form is basically predictable from the local context:
[ɪ]/[i] occur after palatal or alveolar consonants
Sequences of three non-syllabic consonants never surface without epenthesis. Sequences of two consonants sometimes cause epenthesis, depending on the consonants in question.
Nasals and liquids are least likely to accompany epenthesis, as they often syllabify instead, particularly in the following circumstances:
An initial nasal before a homorganic stop optionally becomes syllabic.
An initial liquid before a clitic boundary optionally becomes syllabic.
In /nn/ sequences, the first n syllabifies. (However, in /mm/ sequences, epenthesis occurs instead, yielding [məm].)
In most other initial two-consonant cluster, epenthesis occurs:
/mxan-k/ → [məxanɪk]
/ʔ-mxan-k/ → [ʔəmxanɪk]
Some final clusters are allowed, but others are broken up. The distinction seems to rest partially on the number of syllables in the word as well as the particular sequence of consonants:
/wiʂ-k/ → [wiʂk]
/uːwiʂ-k/ → [uːwiʂɪk]
Assimilation and other phonological changes
Non-initial sequences of identical oral consonants, other than /ʂ/, geminate:
/mðiːlʲ-lʲa/ → [mðiːlʲːa]
/nak-k/ → [nakː]
The sequence /ʂʂ/ can surface as [tʂ]. Thus, /ʔiːpaʂ-ʂ/ may surface as [ʔiːpatʂ] or [ʔiːpaʂɪʂ].
When /t͡ʃ/ follows any segment except /ʂ/ and precedes any unstressed segment, it deaffricates to /ʂ/: /t͡ʃmɲaː-k/ surfaces as [t͡ʃɪmɪɲaːk], but /m-t͡ʃmɲaː-k/ surfaces as [mɪʂɪmɪɲaːk].
For less conservative speakers, /t͡ʃ/ can surface as /ʂ/ before any unstressed segment other than /s/.
Unstressed high vowels can lower to the corresponding mid vowel.
[u] is inserted between a rounded consonant and a round or labial consonant. A rounded consonant can delabialize before any other consonant.
/ɲ/ assimilates to [ŋ] before a velar or post-velar consonant. After a morpheme boundary, [ŋ] is preceded by [ɪ].
Between a back vowel and any following vowel, [w] is inserted:
/juː-uːm/ → [juːwuːm]
/maː-uːm/ → [maːwuːm]
Between a front vowel and a background vowel, /j/ is inserted:
There are constructions with a variable placement of the negative morpheme. In reflexives, the reflexive morpheme mat- can precede or follow the first part of the negative circumfix.
Maricopa has no unique word for "never." The language uses the verb aly-'aa-ma-k'NEGATIVE-hear-NEGATIVE-REAL' and the event that did not occur as a subordinate clause.
Negative adverbs vary in scope depending on their position relative to the negative circumfix. For example, the adverb -haay'still, yet' is outside of the scope of the negation if the order of the morphemes is ma-haay. On the other hand, 'still' is inside of the scope of the negation if the order of the morphemes is haay-ma.[18]
David Gil reports that the Maricopa managed quite well despite having no equivalent for "and". The various relevant relations are solved by using different linguistic structures. However, whether the absence of a lexeme constitutes a lexical gap depends on not a theory but the shared verbal habits of the people using the relevant conceptualization.
Accordingly, it is not valid to say that speakers of Maricopa lack the lexeme "and". Rather, it is speakers of, for example, English who would experience the lack.[22]
The language has no independent adjective category: "Intransitive verbs in their unmarked forms (with no nominalizing morphemes) can be used as attributive adjectives with an NP."[26] Furthermore, it appears that there is no difference between the attributive and the predicative form of adjectival forms.
'iipaa
man
hmii
tall
sper-sh
strong-SUBJECT
ny-wik-k
THIRD/FIRSTPERSON-help-REAL
'iipaa hmii sper-sh ny-wik-k
man tall strong-SUBJECT THIRD/FIRSTPERSON-help-REAL
^ abAntone, Caroline (2000). Piipayk M'iim(PDF). Salt River, Arizona: O'odham Piipaash Language Program. Archived from the original(PDF) on 2016-03-04. Retrieved 2015-10-12.
Gil, David (1991). "Aristotle goes to Arizona, and finds a language without 'and'". In Zaefferer, D (ed.). Semantic universals and universal semantics. Berlin: Foris. pp. 96–130.
Gordon, Lynn (1986). Maricopa Morphology and Syntax. Berkeley: University of California Press. ISBN0520099656.
