Quechuan languages

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
  (Redirected from Quechua language)
Jump to: navigation, search
Qhichwa simi
Runa simi
Region Central Andes
Ethnicity Quechua
Native speakers
7.9 million  (2015)ne2015
  • Quechua
Quechua I
Quechua II
      Kichwa (Ecuador)
      Lowland Peruvian
Official status
Official language in
Language codes
ISO 639-1 qu
ISO 639-2 que, qwe
ISO 639-3 que
Glottolog quec1387[1]


History: origins and divergence[edit]

Quechua had already expanded across wide ranges of the central Andes long before the expansion of the Inca Empire. The Inca were just one among many peoples in present-day Peru who already spoke forms of Quechua. In the Cuzco region, Quechua was influenced by local languages such as Aymara. The Cuzco variety of Quechua developed as quite distinct. In similar way, a diverse group of dialects developed in different areas related to existing local languages during the period when the Inca Empire ruled and imposed Quechua as the official language.

After the Spanish conquest in the 16th century, Quechua continued to be used widely as the "general language" and main means of communication between the Spaniards and the indigenous population. The Roman Catholic Church adopted Quechua to use as the language of evangelisation. Given use by the missionaries, the range of Quechua continued to expand in some areas.

But the administrative and religious use of Quechua was terminated in the late 18th century when it was banned from public use in Peru in response to the Túpac Amaru II rebellion.[2] The Crown banned even "loyal" pro-Catholic texts in Quechua, such as Garcilaso de la Vega's Comentarios Reales. [3] Despite a brief revival of the language immediately after independence in the 19th century, the prestige of Quechua had decreased sharply. Its use gradually was restricted to more isolated and conservative rural areas.[2]

The oldest written records of the language are by missionary Fray Domingo de Santo Tomás, who arrived in Peru in 1538 and learned the language from 1540. He published his Grammatica o arte de la lengua general de los indios de los reynos del Perú in 1560.[4][5]

Current status[edit]

Map of Peru showing the distribution of individual Quechua languages by district.



In recent years, Quechua has been introduced in Intercultural bilingual education (IBE) in Bolivia, Ecuador and Peru, which is, however reaching only a part of the Quechua-speaking population. There is an ongoing process of Quechua-speaking populations shifting to Spanish for the purposes of social advancement.[6]

Radio Nacional del Peru broadcasts spaces in quechua for news and agrarian programs in the mornings.


Number of speakers[edit]


  • Argentina: 900,000 (1971)
  • Chile: few if any
  • Colombia: 25,000 (2000–2007)
  • Ecuador: 2,300,000 (Adelaar 1991)

Additionally, there are an unknown number of speakers in emigrant communities, including Queens, New York and Paterson, New Jersey in the United States.[7]






Family tree[edit]




Quechua I



Ancash (Huaylas–Conchucos)

Huánuco (Alto Pativilca–Alto Marañón–Alto Huallaga)


Wanka (Jauja–Huanca)

Yauyos–Chincha (Huangáscar–Topará)

 Quechua II 
 Northern Peruvian 
(Quechua II-A, reduced)

Ferreñafe (Cañaris)


(Quechua II-A split)


(Quechua II-A split)


 Northern Quechua 
(Quechua II-B)

Ecuadorian Quechua (Highlands and Oriente)

Chachapoyas (Amazonas)

Lamas (San Martín)

Southern Quechua
(Quechua II-C)



Puno (Collao)

Northern Bolivian (Apolo)

Southern Bolivia

Santiago del Estero


Geographical distribution[edit]


Quechua II (Peripheral Quechua, Wamp'una 'Traveler')



A sampling of words in several Quechuan languages:[pronunciation?]

Standardized II-C
Southern Quechua
'ten' chunka chunka
chunka chunka chunga trunga chunka trunka chunka
'sweet' misk'i miski
misk'i misk'i mishki mishki mishki mishki mishki
'he gives' qun qun
qun qon kun qun kun un qun
'one' huk huk
hux uj shuk suq suk huk huk or huq
'two' iskay
ishkay or ishkee
'yes' arí
'white' yuraq yuraq
yuraq yuraj yurak yuraq yurak yulaq yuraq

Quechua and Aymara[edit]



A number of Quechua loanwords have entered English via Spanish, including coca, condor, guano, jerky, llama, puma, quinine, quinoa, vicuña and possibly gaucho. The word lagniappe comes from the Quechuan word yapay ("to increase; to add") with the Spanish article la in front of it, la yapa or la ñapa in Spanish.

The influence on Latin American Spanish includes such borrowings as papa for "potato", chuchaqui for "hangover" in Ecuador, and diverse borrowings for "altitude sickness", in Bolivia from Quechuan suruqch'i to Bolivian sorojchi, in Colombia, Ecuador, and Peru soroche. In Bolivia particularly, Quechua words are used extensively even by non-Quechua speakers. These include wawa (baby, infant), ch'aki (hangover), misi (cat), juk'ucho (mouse), q'omer uchu (green pepper), jacu ("lets go"), chhiri and chhurco (curly haired), among many others. Quechua grammar also enters Bolivian Spanish, such as the use of the suffix -ri. In Bolivian quechua, -ri is added to verbs to signify an action is performed with affection, or, in the imperative, as a rough equivalent to please. In Bolivia -ri is often included in the Spanish imperative to imply "please" or to soften commands. For example, the standard "pásame" (pass me), becomes pasarime.

Quechua has borrowed a large number of Spanish words, such as piru (from pero, but), bwenu (from bueno, good), iskwila (from "escuela," school), waka (from "vaca," cow) and burru (from burro, donkey).

Etymology of Quechua[edit]

At first, Spaniards referred to the language of the Inca empire as the lengua general, the general tongue. The name quichua is first used in 1560 by Domingo de Santo Tomás in his Grammatica o arte de la lengua general de los indios de los reynos del Perú.[12] It is not known what name the native speakers gave to their language before colonial times, and whether it was Spaniards who called it quechua.[12]










Labial Alveolar Postalveolar/
Velar Uvular Glottal
Nasal m n ɲ
Stop plain p t k q
aspirated tʃʰ
ejective p’ t’ tʃ’ k’ q’
Fricative s h
Approximant central j w
lateral l ʎ
Rhotic ɾ


Pronunciation of voiceless bilabial plosive phonemes in Quechua

Problems playing this file? See media help.





Writing system[edit]

Main article: Quechua alphabet




  • continues to use the Spanish five-vowel system.



For more on this, see Quechuan and Aymaran spelling shift.



English Ayacucho Cusco Southern Quechua
to drink upyay uhyay upyay
fast utqa usqha utqha
to work llamkay llank'ay llamk'ay
we (inclusive) ñuqanchik nuqanchis ñuqanchik
day punchaw p'unchay p'unchaw


Morphological type[edit]



Singular Plural
Person First Ñuqa Ñuqanchik (inclusive)

Ñuqayku (exclusive)

Second Qam Qamkuna
Third Pay Paykuna

In Quechua, there are seven pronouns. Quechua has two first person plural pronouns ("we", in English). One is called the inclusive, which is used when the speaker wishes to include in "we" the person to whom he or she is speaking ("us and you"). The other form is called the exclusive, which is used when the addressee is excluded. ("us without you"). Quechua also adds the suffix -kuna to the second and third person singular pronouns qam and pay to create the plural forms qam-kuna and pay-kuna.







Examples using the word wasi (house)
Function Suffix Example (translation)
suffix indicating number plural -kuna wasikuna houses
2.person singular -yki wasiyki your house
3.person plural -n-ku wasinku their house
suffixes indicating case nominative wasi the house (subj.)
instrumental -wan wasiwan with the house, and the house
abessive -naq wasinaq without the house
dative -paq wasipaq to the house
causative -rayku wasirayku because of the house
benefactive -paq wasipaq for the house
locative -pi wasipi at the house
directional -man wasiman towards the house
inclusive -piwan, puwan wasipiwan, wasipuwan including the house
transitive -(rin)ta wasinta through the house
comitative -(ni)ntin wasintin along with the house
immediate -raq wasiraq first the house
intrative -pura wasipura among the houses
comparative -naw, -hina wasinaw, wasihina than the house






Present Past Future Pluperfect



Grammatical particles[edit]



The Quechua languages have three different morphemes that mark evidentiality. Evidentiality refers to a morpheme whose primary purpose is to indicate the source of information.[16] In the Quechua languages, evidentiality is a three-term system. This means that there are three evidential morphemes that mark varying levels of source information. These markers can apply to first, second, and third person.[17] The chart below depicts an example of these morphemes from the Wanka Quechua language.

Wanka Quechua [18]

Evidential Morphemes -m(i) -chr(a) -sh(i)
Meaning Direct evidence Inferred; conjecture Reported; hearsay

The parentheses around the vowels indicate that the vowel can be dropped in when following an open vowel. For the sake of cohesiveness, the above forms will be used to broadly discuss the evidential morphemes. However, it should be noted that there are dialectal variations to the forms. The variations will be presented in the following descriptions.

The following sentences provide examples of the three evidentials and further discuss the meaning behind each of them.

-m(i) : Direct Evidence and Commitment[19]

Regional variations: In the Cuzco dialect, the direct evidential presents itself as –mi and –n.

The evidential –mi indicates that the speaker has a “strong personal conviction the veracity of the circumstance expressed.” [20] It has the basis of direct personal experience.

Wanka Quechua [21]

ñawi-i-wan-mi lika-la-a
eye-1P-with-DIR see-PST-1

I saw them with my own eyes.

-chr(a) : Inference and Attenuation[22]

Regional variations: In Quechua languages, not specified by the source, the inference morpheme appears as –ch(i), -ch(a), -chr(a).

The –chr(a) evidential indicates that the utterance is an inference or form of conjecture. This inference relays the speaker’s non-commitment to the truth-value of the statement. It also appears in cases such as acquiescence, irony, interrogative constructions, and first person inferences. These uses constitute non-prototypical use and will be later discussed in the Changes in Meaning and Other Uses section.

Wanka Quechua[23]

kuti-mu-n'a-qa-chr ni-ya-ami
return-AFAR-3FUT-now-CONJ say-IMPV-1-DIR

I think they will probably come back.

-sh(i) : Hearsay[24]

Regional variations: It can appear as –sh(i) or –s(i) depending on the dialect.

With the use of this morpheme, the speaker “serves as a conduit through which information from another source passes”. The information being related is hearsay or revelatory in nature. It also works to express the uncertainty of the speaker regarding the situation. However, it also appears in other constructions that are discussed in the Changes in Meaning section.

Wanka Quechua[25]

shanti-sh prista-ka-mu-la
Shanti-REP borrow-REF-AFAR-PST

(I was told) Shani borrowed it.

Hintz discusses an interesting case of evidential behavior found in Sihaus Quechua. The author postulates that instead of three single evidential markers, this Quechua language contains three pairs of evidential markers.[26]

Affix or Clitic

It may have been noted the evidential morphemes have been referred to as ‘markers’ or ‘morphemes’. The literature seems to differ on whether or not the evidential morphemes are acting as affixes or clitics, in come cases, such as Wanka Quechua, enclitics. Lefebvre and Muysken (1998) discuss this issue in terms of case but remark as to how the line between affix and clitic is not a clear one.[27] Both terms will be used interchangeably throughout these sections.

Position in the Sentence

The evidentials in the Quechua languages are “second position enclitics” that attach to the first constituent in the sentence as shown in the examples below.[28]

huk-si ka-sqa huk machucha-piwan payacha
once-REP be-SD one old.man-WITH woman

Once there were an old man and an old woman.

They can also occur on a focused constituent.

Pidru kunana-mi wasi-ta tuwa-sha-n
Pedro now-DIR.EV house-ACC build-PROG-3SG

It is now that Pedro is building the house.

Sometimes the affix is described as attaching to the focus, especially when in reference to Tarma Quechua,[29] but this does not hold true for all varieties of Quechua. In Huanuco Quechua. The evidentials follow any number of topics, marked by the topic marker –qa, and the element with the evidential must precede the main verb or be the main verb. However, there are exceptions to this rule as well. The more topics there are in a sentence, the more likely to deviate from the usual form.

Chawrana-qa puntataruu-qu trayaruptin-qa wamrata-qa mayna-shi Diosninchi-qa heqarkaykachisha syelutana-shi
so:already-TOP at:the:peak-TOP arriving-TOP child-TOP already-IND our:God-TOP had:taken:her:up to:heaven:already-IND

When she (the witch) reached the peak, God had already taken the child up into heaven.

Changes in Meaning and Other Uses

Evidentials can be used to relay different meanings depending on the context and perform other functions. The following examples are restricted to Wanka Quechua.

The direct evidential, -mi

The direct evidential appears in Wh-Questions and Yes/No Questions. Considering the direct evidential in terms of prototypical semantics, it seems somewhat counterintuitive to have a direct evidential, basically an evidential that confirms the speaker’s certainty about a topic, in a question. However, if one focuses less on the structure and more on the situation, some sense can be made. The speaker is asking the addressee for information. Therefore, the speaker assumes the speaker knows the answer, or else why would they bother asking. This assumption is where the direct evidential comes into play. The speaker holds a certain amount of certainty that the addressee will know the answer. The speaker interprets the addressee as being in “direct relation” to the proposed content; this situation is the same as when, in regular sentences, the speaker assumes direct relation to the proposed information.[30]

imay-mi wankayuu-pu kuti-mu-la
when-DIR Huancayo-ABL return-AFAR-PAST

When did he come back from Huancayo?

(Floyd 199, p. 85)

The direct evidential affix is also seen in Yes/No Questions. This is similar to the situation with the Wh-Questions. Floyd describes the Yes/No questions as being “characterized as instructions to the addressee to assert one of the propositions of a disjunction”.[31] Once again, the burden of direct evidence is being placed on the addressee, not on the speaker. The question marker in Wanka Quechua, -chun, is derived from the negative –chu marker and the direct evidential (realized as –n in some dialects).

tarma-kta li-n-chun
Tarma-ACC go-3-YN

Is he going to Tarma?

(Floyd 1999, p. 89)

The inferential evidential, -chr(a)

While –chr(a) is usually used in an inferential context, it has some non-prototypical uses.

Mild Exhortation

In these constructions the evidential works to reaffirm and encourage the addressee’s actions or thoughts.

mas kalu-kuna-kta li-la-a ni-nki-chra-ri
more far-PL-ACC go-PST-1 say-2-CONJ-EMPH

Yes, tell them, "I've gone farther."

(Floyd 1999, p. 107)

This example comes from a conversation between husband and wife discussing the reactions of their family and friends after they have been gone for a while. The husband says he plans to stretch the truth and tell them about far places he has gone, and his wife (in the example above) echoes and encourages his thoughts.


With these, the evidential is used to highlight the speaker’s assessment of inevitability of an event and acceptance of it. There is a sense of resistance, diminished enthusiasm, and disinclination in these constructions.


I suppose I'll pay you then.

(Floyd 1999, p. 109)

This example comes from a discourse where a woman demands compensation from the man (the speaker in the example) whose pigs ruined her potatoes. He denies the pigs as being his, but finally realizes he may be responsible and produces the above example.


Somewhat similar to the –mi evidential, the inferential evidential can be found in content questions. However, the salient difference between the uses of the evidentials in questions is that in the –m(i) marked questions, an answer is expected. This is not the case with –chr(a) marked questions.

ima-lla-kta-chr u-you-shrun llapa ayllu-kuna-kta-si chra-alu-l
what-LIM-ACC-CONJ give-ASP-12FUT all family-PL-ACC-EVEN arrive-ASP-SS

I wonder what we will give our families when we arrive.

(Floyd 1999, p. 111)


Irony in language can be a somewhat complicated topic due to how it functions differently in languages and, by its semantic nature, is already somewhat vague. For these purposes, it is suffice to say that when irony takes place in Wanka Quechua, the –chr(a) marker is used.

chay-nuu-pa-chr yachra-nki
that-SIM-GEN-CONJ know-2

(I suppose) That's how you learn [i.e., that is the way in which you will learn].

(Floyd 199, p. 115)

This example comes from discourse between a father and daughter about her refusal to attend school. It can be interpreted as a genuine statement, i.e., perhaps one can learn by resisting school, or as an ironic statement, i.e., that's an absurd idea.

The hearsay evidential, -sh(i)

Aside from being used to express hearsay and revelation, this affix also has other uses.

Folktales, Myths, and Legends

Because folktales, myths, and legends are, in essence, reported speech, it follows that the hearsay marker would be used with them. Many of these types of stories are passed down through generations, furthering this aspect of reported speech. A difference between simple hearsay and folktales can be seen in the frequency of the –sh(i) marker. In normal conversation using reported speech, the marker is used less to eliminate redundancy.


Riddles are somewhat similar to myths and folktales due to their nature to be passed by word of mouth.

ima-lla-shi ayka-lla-sh juk machray-chru puñu-ya-n puka waaka
what-LIM-REP how^much-LIM-REP one cave-LOC sleep-IMPF-3 red cow

(Floyd 1999, p. 142)

Omission and Overuse of Evidential Affixes

In certain grammatical structures, the evidential marker does not appear at all. In all the Quechuan languages the evidential will not appear in a dependent clause. Sadly, no example was given to depict this omission.[32] Omissions can and do occur in Quechua. The sentence is understood to have the same evidentiality as the other sentences in the context. It varies among Quechuan speakers as to how much they omit evidentials, though these occur only in connected speech.[33]

An interesting contrast to omission of evidentials is overuse of evidentials. If a speaker uses evidentials too much with no reason, their competence is brought into question. For example, the overuse of –m(i) could lead others to believe that the speaker is not a native speaker of the language or, in some extreme cases, that one is mentally ill.[17]

Cultural Aspect

By using evidentials, the Quechua culture has certain assumptions about the information being relayed. Those who do not abide by the cultural customs should not be trusted. A passage from Weber (1986) summarizes them nicely below:

  1. (Only) one’s experience is reliable.
  2. Avoid unnecessary risk by assuming responsibility for information of which one is not absolutely certain
  3. Don’t be gullible. There are many folktales in which the villain is foiled by his gullibility.
  4. Assume responsibility only if it is safe to do so. Successful assumption of responsibility builds stature in the community. ([34]

Evidentials also show that being precise and stating the source of one’s information is extremely important in the language and the culture. Failure to use them correctly can lead to diminished standing in the community. Speakers are aware of the evidentials and even use proverbs to teach children the importance of being precise and truthful. Precision and information source are of the utmost importance. They are a powerful and resourceful method of human communication.[35]






In popular culture[edit]

In Da Vinci's Demons, season 2 they meet a group of Indians who speak this language

See also[edit]


  1. ^ Nordhoff, Sebastian; Hammarström, Harald; Forkel, Robert; Haspelmath, Martin, eds. (2013). "Quechuan". Glottolog. Leipzig: Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology. 
  3. ^ Aybar cited by Hart, Stephen M. A Companion to Latin American Literature, p. 6.
  4. ^ Torero, Alfredo (1983). "América Latina en sus lenguas indígenas". Caracas: Monte Ávila. ISBN 92-3-301926-8.  |chapter= ignored (help)
  5. ^ Torero, Alfredo (1974). "El quechua y la historia social andina". Lima: Universidad Ricardo Palma, Dirección Universitaria de Investigación. ISBN 978-603-45-0210-9. 
  7. ^ Claudio Torrens (1011-05-28). "Some NY immigrants cite lack of Spanish as barrier". UTSanDiego.com. Retrieved 2013-02-10.  Check date values in: |date= (help)
  9. ^ Adelaar 2004.[page needed]
  16. ^ Aikhenvald 2004, p. 3.
  17. ^ a b Aikhenvald 2004, p. 377.
  18. ^ Aikhenvald 2004, p. 42.
  19. ^ Floyd 1999, p. 60.
  20. ^ Floyd 1999, p. 57.
  21. ^ Floyd 1999, p. 61.
  22. ^ Floyd 1999, p. 95.
  23. ^ Floyd 1999, p. 103.
  24. ^ Floyd 1999, p. 123.
  25. ^ Floyd 1999, p. 127.
  26. ^ Hintz 1999, p. 1.
  27. ^ Lefebvre & Muysken 1998, p. 89.
  28. ^ Aikhenvald 2004, p. 68-69.
  29. ^ Weber 1986, p. 145.
  30. ^ Floyd 1999, p. 87.
  31. ^ Floyd 1999, p. 89.
  32. ^ Aikhenvald 2004, p. 72.
  33. ^ Aikhenvald 2004, p. 79.
  34. ^ Aikhenvald 2004, p. 358.
  35. ^ Aikhenvald 2004, p. 380.
  36. ^ a b Adelaar 2004, pp. 254–256.
  37. ^ "History". Homepage.ntlworld.com. Retrieved 2012-11-09. 


  • Aikhenvald, Alexandra. Evidentiality. Oxford: Oxford UP, 2004. Print.
  • Floyd, Rick. The Structure of Evidential Categories in Wanka Quechua. Dallas, TX: Summer Institute of Linguistics, 1999. Print.
  • Hintz, Diane. “The evidential system in Sihuas Quechua: personal vs. shared knowledge” The Nature of Evidentiality Conference, The Netherlands, 14–16 June 2012. SIL International. Internet. 13 April 2014.
  • Lefebvre, Claire, and Pieter Muysken. Mixed Categories: Nominalizations in Quechua. Dordrecht, Holland: Kluwer Academic, 1988. Print.
  • Weber, David. "Information Perspective, Profile, and Patterns in Quechua." Evidentiality: The Linguistic Coding of Epistemology. Ed. Wallace L. Chafe and Johanna Nichols. Norwood, NJ: Ablex Pub, 1986. 137-55. Print.

Further reading[edit]

  • Adelaar, Willem F. H. Modeling convergence: Towards a reconstruction of the history of Quechuan–Aymaran interaction About the origin of Quechua, and its relation with Aymara, 2011.
  • Heggarty and David Beresford-Jones, Paul (2009). "Not the Incas? Weaving Archaeology and Language into a Single New Prehistory". London: British Academy Review 12: 11-15 
  • Quechua bibliographies online at: Quecha.org.uk

External links[edit]