Global Journal of Human Social Science, G: Linguistics and Education, Volume 21 Issue 4

hypothesis supported by Gottschling (1905), Lestrade (1960), Stayt (1931), van Warmelo (1960) and Wilson (1969). This hypothesis is linked to the belief that the Vhaven ḓ a originated from the Great Lakes (in East Africa) (Gottschling, 1905). Ralushai (1977), Madiba (1994) and Hanisch (2008) all refer to the legend that some Vhaven ḓ a chiefs such as Sinthumule claimed to speak Malawian languages, leading to the assumption that the Vhaven ḓ a originated from Malawi. Mathivha (1973:1) adds that Tshiven ḓ a forms a bridge between the languages of Central and North-east Africa and languages of Southern Africa. He recognises the Tshiven ḓ a vowel and consonant systems as similar to those of Swahili, Luganda, Chichewa (Malawian language), Shona and Kikuyu. Probably in view of Mathivha’s hypothesis, Makhado (1980:11) says: “A striking feature is that there are similarities between the Tshiven ḓ a vocabulary and the languages spoken in areas where the Vhaven ḓ a are believed to have gone past or lived before they proceeded to the south”. Although it is unclear which lakes the different traditions specifically point to, there is a strong possibility that the Vhaven ḓ a might have stayed around Lake Victoria or Lake Tanganyika before they migrated further south. Archaeological evidence also supports the fact that some Bantu tribes stayed around Lake Victoria, Lake Tanganyika and Lake Albert before migrating to the south (Phillipson, 1977). The present authors are yet to find substantial and recent records on the origin and migration of the Vhaven ḓ a from and to some of aforementioned areas. Thus, no contact between Vhaven ḓ a and other tribes in the area can be established except the contact which the Bantu tribes had with Sudanic languages (Madiba, 1994). b) Tshiven ḓ a’s Contacts with Sudanic Languages The contact between the Bantu tribes and Sudanic people is said to have had led to the adoption of animals such as cattle and sheep and also some pottery wares by the former from the latter (Phillipson, 1977). Madiba (1994) acknowledges that there are similarities between some Tshiven ḓ a names to the proto-forms for animals such as ṅ ombe (cattle), which was derived from the starred word * gòmbè (cattle or ṅ ombe in Tshiven ḓ a) and nngu (sheep, nngu in Tshiven ḓ a), derived from the starred Bantu word * gú . The Tshiven ḓ a forms appear to be very close to those of the proto-language may indicate that the Vhaven ḓ a got these forms directly from the proto-language. Mullan (1969) and Ṋ etswera (2012) say the Vhaven ḓ a were displaced from these areas by the Malawian invaders who came into the area from the Congo region around 1600 and occupied the territory on both sides of the Lake Nyasa. From this area, the Vhaven ḓ a are said to have moved southward into Sena (across the Zambezi in north-eastern Zimbabwe), possibly leading to yet another hypothesis on the Vhaven ḓ a’s origins, i.e., the Vhukalanga Origins Hypothesis (Lestrade, 1927). c) Vhukalanga as the Possible Origin of the Vhaven ḓ a Mutenda in (Makhado, 1980:8) says the Vhaven ḓ a and Vhalemba migrated to the present Ven ḓ a from Zimbabwe or Vhukalanga (Mashonaland) at a place called Hamambo (cf. Khorommbi, 1996:16). Vhukalanga is taken by certain scholars as referring to the present Zimbabwe (Sengani, 2019). Loubser (1988, 1989, 1991) acknowledges that some of the Vhaven ḓ a clans (i.e., the Singo) actually originated in Zimbabwe rather than Central Africa. Loubser supports this argument by referring to the names of the earliest Singo chiefs such as Lozwi (Rozvi), Mambo, Dyambeu and Ṱ hohoyan ḓ ou which are all titles of the Rozwi rulers who inhabited the western part of Zimbabwe (Madiba, 1994). Hence, the following Tshiven ḓ a names also resemble those of the Rozwi/Rozvi, namely; Nyadenga, Dombo, Madanda, Bvumbi, Makoni, Nyatsimba, N ḓ ou (Zhou). The similarity of the names seems to be an indication that the Vhaven ḓ a had some connection with the Rozwi. Lestrade (1960: xxv) established that the Vhaven ḓ a are intimately associated with other Shona groups like the Kalanga, which necessitates the question of whether the Vhaven ḓ a people are an offshoot of the Rozwi or whether they were an independent tribe which later became part of the Rozwi Changamire dynasty. Kuper (1979:63) in accord with Lestrade asserts that “both the [Vhaven ḓ a] and Lovedu [Balobedu] tribes were formed by offshoots of Shona tribes who imposed themselves as ruling sections upon local Sotho-speaking majorities”. The probability, however, could be that the Vhaven ḓ a had a common origin with the Rozwi, who are said to have originated from around Lake Tanganyika (Tanzania). Hence, “more recently,” reveals Hanisch (2008:121), “certain local people are trying to prove linguistic similarities between Tshiven ḓ a and East African languages”. The findings of such studies are yet to be located by the present authors. Apparently, these local people focus more specifically on the suffix nyika because it shows the link between the former German colony, Tanganyika, and one of the legendary Vhaven ḓ a leaders, Dimbanyika (Hanisch, 2008), or Dambanyika (Khorommbi, 1996), so named because he refused to be installed as king after his father, Ntindime, died in 1688 ( Ṋ emudzivha ḓ i, 1994a:2). “Nyika” also occurs “in the Shona language, as a reference to land” (Hanisch, 2008:121), which is quite in line with the hypothesis which points to Vhukalanga as being the possible origin of the Vhaven ḓ a. Although one may refute Zimbabwe as the Vhaven ḓ a’s place of origin, one cannot dispute that the Vhaven ḓ a’s sojourn in this area has been supported by historical evidence (Stayt, 1931; Wentzel, 1983). The Volume XXI Issue IV Version I 39 ( G ) Global Journal of Human Social Science - © 2021 Global Journals Year 2021 Loanword Nativisation in Tshiven ḓ a: A Descriptive Analysis