1

Ita-nia nasaun oin-ida, ita-nia dalen sira oin-seluk

Our nation is one, our languages are different

Language Policy in East Timor
1


Aone van Engelenhoven
(INL, UNTL, Leiden University)

1. Introduction: linguistic genetics
The island of Timor features two language families: Austronesian and Papuan or non-
Austronesian. The genetic relations among the Austronesian languages in Timor have been a
subject of a long debate among linguists that dates back at least to Brandes (1884). Although
his subgrouping argument based on syntactical features was already convincingly refuted by
Jonker in 1914, the so-called Brandes-line separating West Indonesian languages from East
Indonesian (and thus East Timorese) languages has remained valid for typological studies
ever since. At present, the debate focuses on the validity of the reconstructed protolanguage
from which the Austronesian languages of Timor have derived. According to Blust (1993),
there has been one protolanguage, Central Malayo-Polynesian, from which all Austronesian
languages of Timor descended. Whereas several linguists challenged this hypothesis
2
, Hull
(1998) was the first to propose an alternative that could deal with the subgrouping of the
Timorese languages. His hypothesis postulates an Austronesian Proto Timoric with two
descendants: Proto Lowland, from which descended most languages, and Proto Highland.
3

The Lowland languages are subdivided in four groups: West (Roti, Helong and Dawan) that is
confined to (Indonesian) West-Timor, Central (Bekais and Tetum), North (Galoli and the
languages of Wetar in the Indonesian province of Maluku) and East (the dialect chain Kairui-
Waimaa-Midiki-Naueti, Habun and Makuva
4
. The Dawan dialect of the Baikeno enclave in
West Timor is the only representative of the Western group on East Timorese territory. The
three dialects of Atauru Island and the tiny Dadua on the mainland are classified by Hull as
Wetarese. The Tetum language, containing three dialects (Belunese in West Timor
5
, Terik on
the South coast, and Nanaek in Metinaro village) and the creolised variant of Dili, Tetun-
Prasa, is the second largest language in the country. Its importance in the language policy of
East Timor is related to the fact that Standard Tetum is modelled after the Dili variant, the
lingua franca of the country.
The Highland languages are less diverse and subdivided in three groups: West (Tukudede
and Kemak), Central to which belong all three Mambai dialects and East that contains the
Idat-Lakalei-Isn dialect chain. The Lolein isolect spoken in Dili appears to have been
derived from Isn. Mambai is the largest language of East Timor having most speakers.

1
This paper has been written within the framework of a Pilot Project Grant from the Endangered Languages
Documentation Programme (ELDP, no. PPG 0002).
2
For an overview, refer to Engelenhoven 2004: 12-19.
3
With this terminology, I intend to go around the theoretical discussions among Austronesianists that are linked
to the Blust-Hull debate. Whereas he initially labelled the groups A and B (1998), he renamed them in later work
(Hull 2001a) Fabronic and Ramelaic, respectively. The challenging element in this hypothesis is the Fabronic
term (Greek derivative for the Indonesian Tukang besi (smith) Islands, displaying Hulls perception of the
Celebes origin of the Austronesian languages of Timor.
4
Makuva, a hidden (Engelenhoven, forthcoming) or perhaps even moribund (Hajek, Himmelmann and
Bowden 2003, Hull 1998, Hull and Branco 2003) language seems displaced among the non-Austronesian
Fataluku dialects in the tip of East Timor and is an important key to the unravelling of East Timors early
settlement history (e.g. McWilliam 2005). Hull (2004a) recognises a close relationship between Makuva and
Waimaa on one side and Makuva and Southwest Malukan languages like Meher (Kisar Island, Southwest
Maluku) on the other.
5
Distinguishing two subdialects (Troeboes 1987:10-11).
2

Figure 1a: Proto Timor in the Austronesian Languages Family Tree


Figure 1b: Lowland Languages in East Timor
6



6
Kawaimina: acronym for the Kairui-Waimaa-Midiki-Naueti dialect chain (cf. Hull 1998)
Malayo-Polynesian
?
Bima-Sumba-Flores Proto Timor Central Maluku
Lowland Highland
Proto Lowland
West Central North East
Bekais
Tetum
Tetun-Prasa
Galoli
Wetar
Atauru
Kawaimina
Habun
Makuva
3

Figure 1c: Highland Languages in East Timor
7


The four remaining languages to be discussed are not Austronesian. Capell (1943-44)
acknowledged the non-Austronesian origin of Makasai and Bunak. It was not until 1975 that
Voorhoeve found convincing albeit little proof that all four languages were genetically related
to the Trans New Guinea languages in the Bomberai Peninsula (Papua, Indonesia). Again, it
was Hull (2004b) who for the first time elaborately explored the historical relationships
between the non-Austronesian languages of Timor, the Alor-Pantar Islands north of Timor
and the Bomberai Peninsula. Makasai and Fataluku, respectively the third and fourth language
of East Timor in terms of amounts of speakers, share a common ancestor that descended from
a single proto language together with Bunak that is spoken on both sides of the West and East
Timorese border. The last non-Austronesian language, Makalero (spoken in and around
Iliomar), is derived from Makasai with which it is no longer mutually intelligible. Ongoing
research seems to indicate that between the Fataluku dialects and Oirata, the Fataluku
derivative on Kisar Island (Southwest Maluku) there is more intelligibility, albeit that the
latter is morphologically more complex.



7
Idalaka: acronym for the Idat-Lakalei-Isn dialect chain (cf. Hull 1998).
Proto Highland
West Central East
Tukudede
Kemak
Mambai Idalaka
Lolein
4

Figure 2: Genetic Tree of non-Austronesian languages in Timor

Finally, a small note is required on the other, non-native languages in East Timor. Portuguese
is the national language of East Timor next to Tetum.
8
Whereas European Portuguese is used
in the official domains of writing, there is also a specific spoken Timorese variant that
contains typical features of Portuguese speeches in Asia (cf. Carvalho 2001). The Portuguese-
based Bidau creole spoken in Dili by immigrants from Flores Island is now extinct (Baker
1990). Indonesian (Malay), being boosted as the only language of education and government
during the Indonesian Occupation (1975-2000), is spoken by all younger East Timorese. The
author, however, has encountered several older people who did not master Indonesian
fluently. In certain areas, specifically the Lautem and Baikeno Districts, Indonesian rather
than Tetum is still the vernacular for communication with outsiders. The Chinese minority in
East Timor traditionally still speaks Hakka, whereas the few originating from Macau prefer
Yue.

2. sociolinguistic sketch: multilingualism and sprachbund
From the discussion above it can be deduced that East Timor features sixteen indigenous
vernaculars and still three or four foreign ones. The largeness of their speech communities
allows for four of them, Mambai, Tetum, Makasai and Fataluku, to have monolingual
speakers. In practice, however, the author is only aware of monolingual Fataluku speakers. In
general, it can be safely said that most East Timorese master at least three languages: their
native language, the Tetum lingua franca and Indonesian. In comparison with Singapore and
the Indian state of Tamilnadu, bilingualism, or multilingualism for that matter, in East Timor
is related to the individual backgrounds of the speaker rather than to the society. In a town
like Dili, for example, a person may be fluent in Tukudede his fathers language -, in
Makasai his mothers language, and of course in Tetun-Prasa, the vernacular of Dili. If one
of his parents or both are too from a mixed marriage, then it is very well possible that this
person also masters a fourth language that is spoken by at least one of his grandparents,
Mambai, for example. This type of individual multilingualism becomes even more plausible
when it concerns the smaller languages, specifically the Kawaimina and Idalaka dialect
chains, the Atauru dialect chain and the small Makuva, Lolein and Bekais where external
language contacts and consequent mixed marriages are implicit to the survival of the
community. Unlike the Tamilnadu and Singapore cases, there is no fixed languagescape in

8
Refer to Thomaz (1985) for a historical elaboration.
Proto Trans New Guinea
Proto Bomberai
Alor-Pantar Timor
Bunak ?
Makasai Fataluku
Makalero
5
East Timor, unless one would consider the amount of speakers decisive. During my stay in
August 2003, for example, the languagescape
9
of Lospalos would contain Fataluku,
Makasai, Indonesian, Tetun-Prasa and Portuguese albeit that the latter two would be only
marginal. My Dutch and Leti languages would not surface, nor would the Makuva of my
informant, because these languages were not functional in the Lospalos community at that
moment.


Figure 3: Languagescape in Lospalos

How is it possible that one speaker can effortlessly master four different languages? Hull
(2001b) points out that East Timor constitutes a Sprachbund, a region where the languages,
irrespective of their genetic backgrounds, display grammatical convergence. This
convergence often implies simplification of the original grammatical system, as in the
famous Balkan Sprachbund in Eastern Europe where, beside other things, case and tense
inflections are reduced (e.g. Slavonic Bulgarian versus Russian and Romance Rumanian
versus Portuguese). In a sense, East Timor is a Sprachbund within a larger Sprachbund that
comprises all languages within the region outlined by the Brandes line that runs directly

9
Cf. Loven 2004.
Indo-
nesian

Fata-
luku
Portu-
guese
Tetun
-Prasa
Maka-
sai
6
west of Roti Island, east of Celebes Island to the Mamberamo River in Northeast Papua: East
Nusantara
10
. As such, most, if not all languages - whether they be Austronesian or not in
this region lack a passive voice and encode causation by means of a construction featuring the
verb to give, to make or both rather than a special prefix. Hull (2001b:149-154) rightly
observes a decline of pronominal conjugation of verbs in Austronesian languages of Timor.
Whereas most Austronesian languages directly outside Timor still have full paradigms (for
example Roti in the West and Leti in the East), in Timor they are confined to verb stems
having an initial vowel or /h/.
11
The Lowland dialect chain Kairui-Waimaa-Midiki-Naueti
and the Tetum variant of Dili, and the Highland languages Kemak, Tukudede, Isn and its Dili
dialect Lolein lack conjugation altogether. In the Ainaro dialect of Mambai only third person
singular is inflected on vowel-initial verbs, whereas in its fellow dialects no trace remained.
This is exemplified in the following sentences:

(1a) Tetun-Prasa hau hatene ema [neb iha karreta].
Tetun-Terik hau k-atene ema [neeb iha kareta ].
Habun eku tada kera [kabaa iha kareta ].
I know man [which exist car ]
I know a man who has a car.

A comparison of the verbs (underlined in the examples above) shows that in the Tetun-Terik
dialect the verb to know inflects the 1
st
person singular by exchanging its initial /h/ for /k/,
whereas the Dili variant, Tetun-Prasa, leaves the verb uninflected. Its counterpart in Habun,
however, cannot inflect, because of its initial /t/. Although the above example rightly suggests
similarity of using existential verbs to encode possession verbally in all languages, it is
accidental that Habun also has iha as in Tetum. I agree with Geoffrey Hull that the
grammatical convergence in the East Timorese Sprachbund may explain the attested
polyglossy of East Timorese when it comes to indigenous languages. Generally speaking, an
East Timorese language learner only needs to learn the lexicon of an other indigenous
language and not its grammar, because that will be the same as in his native language.
In his latest contribution, Hull (2004b) elaborates the Sprachbund hypothesis for the
non-Austronesian languages. Example (1b) shows that, notwithstanding the different word
order (clause-final verbs (underlined), rather than clause-medial verbs as in the Austronesian
languages), Makasai equals the Austronesian languages in virtually all aspects
12
: it lacks
verbal conjugation and even has a relative marker (waa). The Fataluku sentence, however,
shows that this language does not favour a relative construction (in square brackets) but rather
prefers an existential clause in which a possessive phrase (maari ii karita the mans car)
functions as subject, is firstly nominalized (by means of an enclitic n) and then topicalised.
(1b) Makasai amulafu [waa kareta wee] ani maene.
man which car exist I know
Fataluku [maari ii karita aane-n] ta ana eceremu.
the.man his car exist TOPIC I know
I know a man who has a car.


10
This term was suggested by J. Fox for the first time at the East Nusantara Workshop at The National
Australian University, Canberra, 2000.
11
It was because of its conjugational paradigm that Makuva was initially categorised as a Southwest Malukan
language rather than a Timorese one (Hull 1998, Himmelmann and Hajek 2001).
12
An apparent exception is the Makasai and Makalero deictic systems that encode spatial location with respect
to the speaker in terms of proximity, height and whether the referent is in front or behind the speaker.
7
The Makasai sentence displays what is suggested by ongoing research. The non-Austronesian
grammars more and more tend to align with the Timorese Sprachbund, especially in the
domain of aspect and tense marking. However, Campagnolos work convincingly shows that
the attested convergence is only superficial in Fataluku. Especially the many stress patterns
that intertwine with grammatical constructions in the East and South dialects and the manifold
clause nominalisations separate Fataluku from the other Timorese languages that aligns rather
with the languages of Southwest Maluku. From a purely linguistic point of view, the
grammatical divergence of Fataluku would explain why Tetum did not manage to function as
a lingua franca in the Lautm District.

3. Preamble to language policy: diglossia and ritual speech in East Timor
Based on the previous discussion it does not come as a surprise that in East Timor the
formal and informal domains are occupied by separate speech variants, referred to in
sociolinguistic literature as diglossia (Hudson 2002). Diglossia is an intrinsic component in
the evolution of a society that can be diagnosed by six sociological features. Both varieties are
functionally different, because they pertain to their own domains. High variants have more
prestige than low variants, which in western societies is clearly related to the third feature: the
presence or absence of a literary heritage. Low varieties are typically learned at home,
whereas mastering a high variety implies education or schooling. As such, it is always the
high variant that is standardised. Diglossia is stable when both variants pertain to their
exclusive domains, as in Tamil, for example. Three purely linguistic features of diglossia are
the grammatical complexity of the high varieties over the low varieties, their lexical
exclusiveness, and the fact that, in case of classic diglossia, the high variety has exclusive
sounds or is a subset in the low varietys phonology.
It may safely be hypothesised that in pre-colonial times diglossia in each society
pertaining to an ethnolinguistic group was in first instance classic. The respective high and
low varieties were genetically related and variants of the same language. Because these
languages were not yet written, the high low distinction was rather linked to the dichotomy
ritual versus colloquial speech.
Without any doubt, it has been James J. Fox elaborate analysis of Roti (West Timor) that
has boosted the scientific study of ritual speech, e.g. poetry, songs and other types of verbal
art in East Nusantara. Most investigation, however, has focused on Austronesian languages
outside East Timorese territory. Hence, Middelkoops voluminous study of Dawan burying
rituals in West Timor legitimises the expectation of similar traditions in the Baikeno dialect
and Theriks (2004) analysis of Belu ritual traditions in West Timor suggests a comparable
situation for the East Timorese Tetum dialects. The only examples of Austronesian ritual
speech in East Timor were texts samples in Duarte (1984) taken from the Atauru dialects and
in Traube (1980, 1986) taken from Mambai. An underexposed fact is, however, that Berthe
(1959, 1972) and Berthe and Berthe-Friedberg (1978), and Lameiras-Campagnolo and
Campagnolo (1979) discussed at length ritual speech in the non-Austronesian Bunak and
Fataluku, respectively.
Although not actually looked for at the time, these contributions already clearly display
the phenomenon of lexical parallelism, the pairing of words that constitutes the major
instrument in verbal art performances. Whereas the occurrence of many word pairs in a
language, for example man and woman, are universal, Engelenhoven (1997) shows that
the order of the words may be culturally motivated. Thus, in the language of Leti Island off
the eastern tip of Timor, woman precedes man, signalling the matrilineal character of its
society. Off the western tip of Timor, man precedes woman in the dialects on Roti Island
whose society has a patrilineal organisation. Interestingly, Fox (2005) links the phenomenon
of lexical parallelism in Bunak to extensive influence from its Austronesian neighbour
8
Kemak. Ongoing research in Fataluku suggests a large similarity between word pairs in this
language and its Austronesian neighbours off shore in Southwest Maluku.
13

Corte-Real (1998) is the first extensive study on Mambai lexical parallelism and at this
moment the only one that elaborates this phenomenon in an East Timorese language. Beside
artistic embellishment in speech, Corte-Real (2000) elaborates that the main function of word
pairing in Mambai ritual speech is the construal and consolidation of kingship and kinship, the
two pillars on which Mambai society is organised. The following examples show that through
pairing words their separate meanings are combined to depict a unique concept. From a
lexicological point of view, all words are categorised in dyadic sets (Fox 2005) that
conceptualise the philosophical heritage of a culture.

separate meanings combined meaning
(2) Mambai hat nor rae stone and soil kingdom
sulu rua // ri pat two roofs // four pillars lineage
um nor ap house and fire (family) home
hat-pae // ai-tidi brick // stilt (rural) house
Corte-Real (2000:48)

It is hypothesised that the spread of Tetum during the expansion of the two Tetum-speaking
kingdoms Luka (East Timor) and Wehali (West Timor), did not modify this situation
(Thomaz 1974, 1981). The fact that all languages in the regions around the Tetum-speaking
areas still have their own ritual speeches suggests that its introduction as lingua franca had no
effect on the speech decorum as such, because Tetum itself was spoken in the same cultural
framework. A research question could be, whether Tetum lexical parallels were transferred
into the other languages during this period.
The establishment of Portuguese colonial rule in the 18
th
and 19
th
century created a single
East Timorese society that featured an extended diglossia (after Fishman 1967) in which the
respective indigenous languages became the low variety for the informal domains and
Portuguese the high variety for the formal domains. The move of the Portuguese
administration from Lifau in the Baikeno enclave to Dili in 1769 enabled the development of
the latters variant as East Timors lingua franca in interethnic communication. Being a
genuine lingua franca exclusively for trade at the marketplace (as is indicated by prasa
marketplace), this language did not have a specific register for ritual affairs. As such, the
promotion of Tetun-Prasa at the expense of traditional Tetum (Tetun-Terik) created a
situation in which the ritual speeches were pushed back into the exclusivity of the separate
ethnolinguistic groups, out of East Timorese colonial society.

4. East Timorese self-perception and the search for a national language
The present self-perception of the Timorese evolved in intellectual circles of the resistance
forces during the Indonesian Occupation (1976-2000) - generally referred to with the Tetum
word funu (war). As such, it parallels the rise of Indonesian nationalism in the beginning of
the 20
th
century as vocalised by the Sumpah Pemuda the Oath of the Youth during the
Second National Youth Congress in 1928:


Pertama: Kami poetera poeteri Indonesia
mengakoe bertoempah dara j. satoe, tanah
Indonesia.
Kedoea: Kami poetera poeteri Indonesia
Firstly: We sons and daughters of Indonesia
acknowledge sharing one native country, the land of
Indonesia.
Secondly: We sons and daughters of Indonesia

13
Notwithstanding its non-Austronesian language, Fataluku culture seems to be based on an Austronesian
model (cf. McWilliam 2005). This questions the validity of language as a determiner of culture.
9
mengakoe berbangsa j. satoe, bangsa
Indonesia.
Ketiga: Kami poetera poeteri Indonesia
mendjoedjoeng bahasa persatoean, bahasa
Indonesia.
(Steinhauer 2000:15, footnote 9)

acknowledge being one people, the people of
Indonesia.
Thirdly: We sons and daughters of Indonesia uphold
the unifying language, the language of Indonesia.

Jos Ramos-Horta, one of the main ideologists of the Revolutionary Front of Independent
East Timor (Frente Revolucionaria de Timor Leste Independente, FRETILIN) informs in his
biography that:

I was also fully aware of the need to look into our own historical and cultural realities I began
therefore to concoct our own version of social democracy by coining the word Mauberism from
Maubere, a common name among the Mambai that had become a derogatory expression meaning poor,
ignorant.
14
(Ramos-Horta 1987: footnote on p. 37)

The Oath of the Youth originally only emphasised the equality of all Indonesian peoples as
is also propagated by the national maxim bhineka tunggal ika unity in diversity. It left
Indonesias cultural diversity untouched. The Maubere Concept focused on the underdog
position of the East Timorese being looked down on by the Portuguese and later the
Indonesian colonisers. In this aspect, it equals the Oath of the Youth: there is no intention to
culturally or ethnically assimilate the diverse groups in East Timor.
Another point of agreement between Malay in 1928 and Tetun-Prasa in 1974 is the
absence of a specific honorific register. Because Javanese lexically distinguished socially
high speech (krama) from low speech (ngoko), it was rejected at the congress as the
national language, notwithstanding the fact it was the language of the largest ethnic group in
Indonesia. Because it basically lacks parallelism as a productive lexical process, Tetun-Prasa
could not encode social difference like the other languages in Timor. In other words, both
languages qualified to meet the need of egalitarianism among the different ethno-linguistic
groups. The fact that both Malay and Tetun-Prasa had a long history as lingua franca in their
respective countries while neither was linked to a specific ethnic group motivated their choice
as national language.
An important difference is that the Second National Youth Congress merely formulated a
basic philosophy for Indonesian nationalism, whereas the FRETILIN manual rather
formulated a governmental programme for an independent state. The choice for Tetun-Prasa,
although understandable in a Mauberist approach, in fact collided with basic assumptions in
the Timorese diglossic society. Unlike Malay, Tetum in general, and specifically Tetun-Prasa
did not have a literary tradition and as such could never reach the level of a high variety

14
Sa (1961) informs about the Tetum counterpart Mau-Berek:


Em teto h nomes prprios herldicos,
que s nobreza dado uzar; e h-os
plebeus, humildes, que designam, s por
si, a baixa posio da pessoa a quem foram
dados.
Mau-Berek e um desdes, e dos mais
generalizados. Qualquer indgena que diga
chamar-se Mau-Berek identifica-se logo
como submissa criatura humana, cujo
fadrio na hierarquia social timorense
servir.
(Sa 1961:34)
There are heraldic proper names in Tetum that are
only for use by the nobility; and there are plebeian,
humble ones that on their own signal the low position
of the ones to whom they are given.

Mau-Berek is one of these, and one of the most general
ones. Any indigenous person who says to be called
Mau-Berek identifies himself instantly as a submissive
human creature, whose destiny in the Timorese social
hierarchy is to serve.


10
language. FRETILINs programme is quite clear about this fact as can be seen from its 1974
manual:

In the first period we will not be able to adopt TETUM as our official language, because although our
language has been spoken by our people for centuries, it hasnt evolved because we have been dominated by
a colonial power.

Despised and forbidden, Tetum couldnt accompany the evolution of society. Many expressions dont exist.
Many others exist but we are not aware of them. A profound study of our language is needed, so that we can
speak and utilise our language in the future. This is not possible at the moment That is why we adopt a
foreign language. It is easier because Portuguese is already spoken in our country.
(What is FRETILIN? 1974:5)

Albeit an admission of weakness within the FRETILIN philosophy, the maintenance of
Portuguese in the independent East Timorese nation to be was only logical. Notwithstanding
it being the language of the coloniser, its literary heritage and consequent prestige made it a
qualified candidate for a high variety. However, its contemporary rival, the Timorese
Democratic Popular Association (Associao Popular Democrtica Timorense, APODETI)
that preferred inclusion into the Republic of Indonesia, equally stressed the right [t]o enjoy
the Portuguese language and civilization.
15
Geoffrey Hull (1999) convincingly explains the
East Timorese bent for Portuguese and Portugal as an effect of the latters colonial rule that
intended to assimilate the local population into the Portuguese way of life.
Steinhauer (2000) elaborates how the original equality principle of peoples in the
Indonesian Oath of the Youth was adapted to a unitary principle near the end of the
Japanese Occupation (1942-1945). At the time Indonesia proclaimed its independence, Malay
had become the language of the state (bahasa negara) as verbalised in section 36 of Chapter
XV in the Constitution of 1945: Bahasa Negara adalah Bahasa Indonesia.
16
Some of the
larger languages, like Javanese and Achenese, still were taught as additional subjects in the
primary school and in the first classes of high school as in the colonial period.
Steinhauer explains how President Suhartos New Order policy was the main impetus
for a centralised control of the republic. The philosophy of this policy was epitomised by the
Five Pillars (Panca Sila) that were taught at school. For this discussion the first and third
principle are the most important: Ketuhanan Yang Maha Esa Belief in One Almighty and
Persatuan Indonesia Unity of Indonesia. The latter principle redefined the Indonesian
language as a hallmark of an Indonesian unitary identity instead of being the language shared
by all Indonesian peoples. From 1975, only Indonesian was allowed as language of instruction
throughout Indonesia. As such, the governmental institute responsible for the standardisation
of Indonesian and its implementation in society, the Pusat Pembinaan dan Pengembangan
Bahasa (the Centre for Language Development and Cultivation) came under the direct
supervision of the minister of Education and Culture. The first principle required all citizens
to adhere to a monotheist religion. The policys concern with religion as evidence of anti-
communism institutionalised the training of preachers in Indonesian.
After East Timors incorporation into the Republic of Indonesia in 1976, Indonesia
therefore became the sole language of administration and instruction as everywhere in
Indonesia. Rowena Lennox (2000) describes how nevertheless the implementation of the
Indonesian state philosophy evoked an exclusive situation. The monotheist principle of Panca
Sila forced a massive abandoning of traditional beliefs in favour of Roman Catholicism in the
1980-ies. The fact that from 1977 until 1988 East Timor was under direct administration of

15
Quoted in Hull 1999:61, footnote 13.
16
The language of the state is Indonesian.
11
the Vatican is of major importance for East Timorese language policy during and after the
Occupation.
The Indonesian government failed to notice the difference between Portuguese and Dutch
colonialism (Hull 1999) and banned the use of Portuguese from East Timorese society as it
had removed the use of Dutch from early Indonesian society. Unlike Dutch, however,
Portuguese was an integral part of East Timorese culture. It was still the language of liturgy in
the Roman Catholic Church. The administrative vacuum East Timor was in after the
resignation of the Portuguese Bishop Jos Joaquim Ribeiro in 1977, gave the succeeding
apostolic administrator, Father Martinho da Costa Lopes (1977-1983) the chance to promote
Tetum as the alternative language of liturgy instead of Portuguese or Indonesian. After the
official approval by the Vatican in 1980, the diocese of Dili prepared a Tetum ordinance for
Mass and re-introduced a Tetum catechism (Smyth 1999:101, footnote 3).
In a sense, the Indonesian governments attempts to remove Portuguese from society and
to introduce Indonesian instead strengthened the position of the first mentioned as the pre-
eminent language of the underground resistance. The unique position of the Roman Catholic
Church in occupied East Timor gave it the possibility to develop Tetum into the language of
resistance aboveground.


5. Language policy step 1: standardisation of Tetum
It was clear from the very beginning that Tetun-Prasa was a candidate to achieve official
status in an independent East Timor. However, in its quality as an unwritten lingua franca
unlike Malay in Indonesia it could never meet three interlinked decisive requirements for a
successful diglossic society in a Timorese context: prestige, literary heritage and stability.
This is confirmed in Grgorio da Silvas (1999) formulation of the basic assumptions on
Tetun-Prasa:

Many East Timorese have no confidence in their own culture, or in the potentialities of the Tetum
language :
Tetum is a primitive language with a poor vocabulary.
Tetum has no grammar, and therefore cannot be used for writing of books.
Tetum cannot be standardized because it is broken up into dialects whose forms contradict each
other.
Tetum is the language of the poor and ignorant. Therefore, another language is needed for East
Timor to have respect and self-respect in the modern world.
(Silva 1999:11)

The literature on language policy time after time confirms that its literary heritage is one of
the main motivations to assign official status
17
to a language. Badruzah Nasrin (2003), for
example, explains the bloody secession of East Bengal from the Republic of Pakistan in 1971
as a failure of the imposed Urdu language to match the literary tradition of Bengali, the
official language of the new nation of Bangladesh. The literary tradition of Malay enabled its
endorsement as official language in Malaysia and Indonesia. Because none of the languages
in The Philippines had such a tradition, the choice for Tagalog as model for the national
language remains arbitrary and thus questionable for speakers of other rival languages, as for
example Cebuano (Steinhauer 2005).
The awareness of this fact stimulated Dr. Filomeno Abel Jacob SJ, the minister of
education during the transition period from Indonesian rule to Independence (2000-2002), to
establish in 2001 the Instituto Nacional de Lingustica the National Institute of Linguistics

17
I purposively use the term official here instead of national. All sixteen indigenous languages of East Timor
have national status, but only Portuguese and Tetum are official languages to be used in administration.
12
(INL) whose principal task was the standardisation of Tetum.
18
As already explained above,
the creolised Tetum variant of Dili was chosen as the model for a national Tetum. Adhering to
one of the rural dialects would have doubtlessly evoked a Philippine scenario, in which
diverse dialects, for example Vikeke and Suai, would compete to become the national
standard. Beside rivalry in lia-loos correct speech in terms of pronunciation and grammar,
there was also the danger of oin loos correctness of the oral traditions in the respective
dialects. The latter would ultimately expand to similar questions on the oral traditions in the
other languages in East Timor.
In itself, the choice for Tetun-Prasa was already a seed of disruption, because neither its
pronunciation nor its grammar would be acceptable to first language speakers of one of the
rural dialects. By devising a unified spelling, the ortografia patronizada, INL intended to
neutralise this danger. At this point, I quote INLs 2002 spelling guide:

Bainhira Timoroan hotu-hotu hakerek lia-
tetun tuir banati deit, ita-nia lian nasionl
bele hetan unidade neeb nia presiza
nuudar dalen nasionl Timr Lorosae
nian, nuudar ms dalen ofisil hamutuk ho
lia-portugs.
(Matadalan Ortogrfiku 2002)
When all Timorese write Tetum according to a single
model only, our national language can find the unity it
needs as national language of East Timor, and also as
official language next to Portuguese.

Elsewhere, INL intends to meet the Literary Heritage Requirement, by explaining that its
orthography is evolutionary rather than revolutionary (Instituto Nacional de Lingustica
2004:2). The spelling system is the outcome of a historical process of 115 years, rather than
the invention of an individual at a certain point in time. There are two periods in the spelling
history of Tetum: from the first dictionary by Fr. Sebasitio Maria Aparcio da Silva in 1889
to the spelling proposal of Fr. Artur Baslio de S in 1952, and from the proposal of the
FRETILIN literacy committee in 1975 to the orthographic guideline by INL in 2002.
The first period is located in the era of Portuguese colonialism during which only
Portuguese could function as a writing vehicle. From 1889 to 1952, Tetum orthography
focused on an adequate phonetic representation with the intention to facilitate lusophone
speakers to learn the language. This explains that Silvas writing system in 1889 closely
followed Portuguese conventions, albeit that it did adapt to Tetum phonetic reality. Important
innovations by Silva were, among others, the use of <k> instead of <qu> representing
voiceless velar stops before front vowels, e.g. klate instead of qulate gun (now: kilat).
Raphael das Dores (1907) generalised the use of <k> to all voiceless velar stops, thus
replacing the Portuguese <c>, e.g. kotuku instead of ctuco back (now: kotuk). Another
important innovation is the use of the hyphen in lexical compounds, e.g. mssin-midal (salt-
sweet) sugar (now: masin-midar). The use to add <e> and <o> as echo vowels after final
dental and velar consonants that reflected a pronunciation habit of lusophones disappeared
after Dores. Manuel Patricio Mendes and Manuel Mendes Laranjeiras (1935) dictionary
replaced the Portuguese habit of writing final back high vowels as <o> for an <u>, but re-
introduced the <c>, e.g. tcu to flee instead of Dores tko and Silvas tco (now: teku). The
last Portuguese contributor, Fr. Arturo Baslio de S, confirmed Dores <k> instead of <c>
and used <s> to represent a voiceless sibilant between vowels where Portuguese traditionally
used <c> before front vowels, <> before low and back vowels or <ss> otherwise, e.g. tasi

18
The establishment and the function of INL seem to mirror closely the Indonesian Pusat bahasa (Language
Centre, cf.Steinhauer 2005:66-69). This institute is directly under the administration of the ministry of
education, youth and sports and exists independently next to the Centro Nacional de Investigaes Cintificas
the National Centre of Scientific Research (CNIC).
13
sea instead of tci, asu dog instead of o or au and kesar to accuse instead of qussar
or kssar.
The second period starts after an interlude of 23 years with the spelling proposal by the
FRETILIN Literacy Committee. It elaborates Fr. de Ss objective of devising a single
orthography for all Timorese languages. Whereas Fr. de Ss intention was purely practical,
FRETILINs perspective was of course related to the Mauberist ideal of unity. An important
difference with the previous period was that now the aim was a writing system that would
correctly reflect the linguistic reality of the Timorese languages and not of the colonial
language Portuguese. Consequently, the Portuguese habit of placing acute and circumflex
diacritics was abolished, e.g. bosok to lie instead of bsk, and manu-oan chicken instead
of mnu-an. In the same context, the representation as <ou> of the back vowel offglide
allophone [] was banned.
Another difference with the previous period was that now a Portuguese-speaking middle
class had emerged that caused sociolinguistically motivated differences in pronunciation.
Whereas the previous lexicographers exclusively dealt with a monostratal Tetum, now the
pronunciation of lexical loans differentiated social class. Hull and Eccles (2001) describe
three sociolinguistic strata for Tetum: an acrolect whose speakers are educated and have good
command of Portuguese, a mesolect whose speakers are literate but have not mastered
Portuguese well, and a basilect whose speakers are illiterate and do not know any Portuguese.
INL (2004:11-2, footnote 15) elaborates how the FRETILIN proposal acknowledged the
polyvalent pronunciation of seven consonantal loan phonemes for which it assigned the
graphemes: <g>, <j>, <p>, <rr>, <v>, <x>, <z>. The following table provides examples of
each grapheme with their pronunciations in the respective lects.
19


Grapheme <g> <j> <p> <rr> <v> <x> <z>
basket help kitchen
20
car favour queue use
raga ajuda dapur karreta favr bixa uza
Acrolect [ra@ga] [/aZu@da] [da@pur] [karre@ta] [favo@r] [bi@Sa] [/u@za]
Mesolect [ra@ga] [/azu@da] [da@pur] [kare@ta] [favo@r] [bi@Sa] [/u@za]
Basilect [ra@ka] [/AJdu@da] [da@bur] [kare@ta] [fabo@r] [bi@sa] [/u@sa]

Table 1: FRETILIN script for polyvalent consonants

Albeit it that writing in Tetum was not yet common practice at the time, most writing used
Portuguese orthography for Portuguese loans. To secure the Tetum character in letters and
alike, also the Portuguese suffix o was adapted to aun and the <g> representing a voiced
palatal sibilant before front vowels was replaced by <j>, e.g. nasaun nation instead of nao
and imajen image instead of imagem.
When the Vatican acknowledged Tetum as the liturgical language in the Roman Catholic
Church instead of Indonesian in 1980, a special commission of the Dili Diocese
21
added a few
adaptations to the FRETILIN proposal in order to quantify a high variety with which an
ordinarium could be written. Its most important contribution was to confine the use of the
acute diacritic to indicate aberrant stress, which is not on the penultimate syllable, e.g. mana
[ma@na] sister versus man [mana@] manna.

19
The examples are taken from Hull (1996).
20
Observe that this is a Malay rather than a Portuguese loan.
21
The most important members were Mgr. Martinho da Costa Lopes and the present bishop of Dili, Mgr.
Alberto Ricardo da Silva.
14
The present author can confirm from own experience Williams-van Klinkens, Hajeks
and Nordlingers (2002) observation that in written Tetun-Prasa, especially in emails, there is
a strong tendency of maintaining the Portuguese orthography for writing Portuguese loans.
Klinken (1999:20) rightly points at its possible effect on the reading pace, albeit it that the
simultaneous use of both spellings seems to have little effect on the understanding of the text.
The problem of macaronic spelling (Hull 1994) became the major task of the International
Academic Committee for the Development of East Timorese Languages (IACDETL, 1996)
lodged at the University of Western Sydney. The most important problem to tackle in this
context was to find a solution for the Portuguese digraphs <lh> and <nh> that represent the
palatal liquid and nasal, respectively. In fact, it was with respect to these two digraphs that the
wish for a single orthography for all Timorese languages clashed with the phonological
inventory of some of these languages as for example the Atauru dialects (e.g. Duarte 1984).
For example, in the Kawaimina dialect chain there are exclusive sets of ejective and aspirated
consonants not to be found elsewhere in Timor.
22
The IACDETL assigned <lh> and <nh> to
the aspirated liquid and dental nasal,
23
as in Waimaa lhada [lha@da] pile of stones, nhala
[nha@la] head (Grupu peskiza lian Waimaa 2005). For the Portuguese palatal nasal and
liquid it proposed <> and <ll> instead, which were copied from the Spanish orthography.
24

The IACDETL orthography became more and more popular after one of its members,
Geoffrey Hull, published his Standard Tetum-English Dictionary in 1999.
25

INL endorsed the IACDETL proposal in the first place, because it reflected the
phonological history of Tetum and as such met the Stability Requirement in a diglossic
society as discussed above. Most orthographic inconsistencies were solved by IACDETL in
1996. However, the use of the apostrophe <> referring to a glottal stop remained a problem.
Fr. Silva introduced its use already in 1889 and as such, the apostrophe had become part of
the spelling history of Tetum, and therefore was significant in the Literary Heritage
Requirement. The danger of a Philippine scenario of competing dialects was lurking here
too, because Tetun-Prasa, being the model for official Tetum, did not have a glottal stop in its
phonemic inventory. The wish for a single spelling for all languages, however, imposed the
maintenance of the apostrophe in the ortografia padronizada the standardised spelling.
Inherent to a standard spelling is the tendency to define a standard pronunciation,
implying that the aberrancy of Tetun-Prasa pronunciation be non-standard and hence
incorrect. To prevent this, INL defined the pronunciation of the glottal stop to be individually
motivated and only stressed its correct representation in the words:
Maski ema balu baibain la hatete ho
kappa-tatolan, iha ortografia tuir banati ita
sempre hakerek apstrofu hodi reprezenta
son nee. Selae ita la konsege distinge
liafuan rua atu hanesan, porezemplu toos
(keras) no toos (ladang).
(Hakerek Tuir Banati 2002:14)
Although several people never pronounce a glottal
stop, we always write an apostrophe in the standard
orthography to represent this sound. Otherwise we
would not be able to distinguish from each other, for
example toos (hard) and toos (garden).
26


22
For the Naueti dialect, refer to Saunders 2002/3. For the Waimaa dialect, refer to Hajek and Bowden 2002.
23
The recent most spelling for Waimaa is by the Research Group of the Waimaa Documentation Project
(Grupu peskiza lian Waimaa 2005).
24
The link to Spanish (Castillian) was a serious objection for those who stressed the Portuguese identity of the
spelling.
25
A preliminary spelling for Fataluku based on the Central Dialect was already devised by Geoffrey Hull in
1994 on request of Mgr. Belo. Within the framework of the Fataluku Language Project (funded by the
Netherlands Research Council research no. ELP-05-04) lodged at INL and Leiden University, the present author
will adapt the orthography in order to overcome divergences in vowel length and prosody as have been attested
in the South and East dialects.
26
Interestingly, the Tetum text uses Indonesian translations (keras hard and ladang field,garden, respectively)
to explain the differences in meaning.
15

From 2002 onward, INL disseminated a spelling guide and an orthography course among
journalists and in schools. By organising workshops for journalists and teachers, it tries to
promote the standard spelling. In 2004, the government acknowledged by decree the
ortografia padronizada as the official orthography for Tetum in the Republic of East Timor.

-/-

Having settled the spelling problem, INL still had to face the lack of prestige in the domains
of lexicon and grammar, albeit that Geoffrey Hull and Luis Costa published large dictionaries
that could meet the Prestige Requirement.
Myers-Scotton (2002) elaborates that words have a mini-grammar of their own, which
they may take along when they are transferred into a different language. This fact leads to a
situation of islands whose languages differ from the matrix language. This has been attested
in Kenya where Swahili discourse can be marbled with English islands that beside English
lexicon also feature English grammar. The lingua franca character of Tetun-Prasa inevitably
enables such a scenario in which Portuguese, Indonesian and English loans influence the
morphological and syntactic blueprint of its grammar, thus confirming the popular opinion of
Tetum not having any grammar and thus not being a true language. At this point, I would
like to quote a line from a written interview between journalists of Sara Timor-Leste and INL
held on the 30
th
of August, the fourth anniversary of the Referendum:

[Jornaliste sira] sei aprende tetun
literariu, la kahur ona vokabulriu Tetun
ho vokabulriu indonziu ka ingles, ka
hatama barbarizmu (sala boot) hanesan
husu obrigadu envezde hatoo obrigadu;
suporte iha fali apoiu nia fatin, estratejia
bainhira estratjia (fihir didiak asentu iha
neeb) mak liafuan loos, staf las fali
pesol, no seluseluk tan .
(Badain no Knaar 2003:6)
[Journalists] should learn literary Tetum and not
mix Tetum vocabulary with Indonesian or English
vocabulary, or insert barbarisms (major errors) like
husu obrigadu instead of hatoo obrigadu; suporte
in the place of apoiu, estratejia when estratjia
(watch carefully where the accent is) is the right word,
staf and not pesol etcetera.

Whereas failures in positing diacritics, e.g. estratejia [/EstrateZi@a] instead of estratjia
[/Estrate@Zia] could easily be dealt with in the spelling guide and orthography course, the
lexical and grammatical influences from English and Indonesian, respectively, demand
special attention. By classifying grammatical influences from East Indonesian Malay, like
husu obrigadu to thank (< Ind. minta terima kasih, lit. beg thanks) as a barbarism, INL
managed to set up a framework for correct Tetum, in this special case: hatoo obrigadu
offer ones thank as it was verbalised in the prescriptive grammar by Hull and Eccles
(2001). The lexical influence of especially English, e.g. the erroneous suporte (< English
support) meaning physical support, prop instead of the meant apoiu (financial/ psycho-
logical) support (< Port. apoio), requires more attention, because English is an important
contact language between East Timorese and international relief agencies.
To counter this thread and to even more meet the Prestige Requirement for Tetum,
Geoffrey Hull, under auspices of INL, is preparing a major monolingual Tetum dictionary,
whereas the National University of East Timor is preparing a special department of Tetum
studies (Hull 2002a:27).
16

6. Language policy step 2: how to manage language diversity?
In the process of defining its own identity, East Timor stresses its languagescape and the
diversity of its indigenous languages, as is formalised in Article 13 in the Constitution:

Artigo No 13
(Lnguas oficiais e lnguas nacionais)
1. O ttum e o portugus so as lnguas
oficiais da Repblica Democrtica de
Timor-Leste.
2. O ttum e as outras lnguas nacionais so
valorizadas e desenvolvidas pelo Estado.
(Kster 2004: 4)
Article No. 13
(Official Languages and National languages)
1. Tetum and Portuguese are the official languages of
the Democratic Republic of East Timor.

2. Tetum and the other national languages are
cherished and developed by the State.

Clause 1 acknowledges the official status of Portuguese and Tetum, whereas clause 2
confirms that all indigenous languages have the status of national language. Eccles (2000)
aptly points out that in this respect the East Timorese constitution is reminiscent of the
constitutions of Spain and the republic of Vanuatu. Both constitutions have specific clauses
that acknowledge the linguistic diversity of the nation as cultural patrimony (Spain) or
national heritage (Vanuatu). Nevertheless, the Spanish and Vanuatu strategies to maintain
linguistic diversity cannot be copied on to the East Timorese case where Portuguese culture is
an intrinsic element in the cultural awareness. Hence, the official status of Portuguese and the
attempts for its re-introduction in society should not be compared with the status of Castilian
in Spain or English in Vanuatu.
27

Although decisive evidence from this period is lacking, it can be safely hypothesised that
at the end of the 19
th
century, East Timorese society developed a stable diglossia in which
Tetum, or better still, Tetun-Prasa occupied the lingua franca domain without really effecting
the positions and functions of the local languages. During the Indonesian Occupation (1975-
2000), Portuguese was removed from society and replaced by Indonesian. Indonesian,
however, could impossibly take over the cultural function of Portuguese and as such fully
destabilised the diglossic pattern of East Timorese society. The Indonesian state philosophy of
the time created a situation in which the new high variant, Indonesian, seized most domains in
public life at the cost of the local languages. At the moment Indonesia withdrew from East
Timor, the ritual registers and oral traditions in most local languages were about to enter
complete oblivion if they are not yet forgotten already.
At the same time the enthusiastic acceptance of Tetum and its popularity among the East
Timorese as their official language, creates a new danger in the eyes of INL. The case of
Arabic in Egypt shows that in classic diglossia types, the low variant takes over the functions
of the high variant. The case of Indonesian shows that in extended diglossia types, where both
variants are genetically unrelated languages, it is the high variant that takes over the functions
of the low variants. Translated to East Timor, this may imply that in the attempt to define and
introduce a literary, acrolectal Tetum, as for example through the dissemination of the
extremely popular Malay-Tetum dictionary (Hull and Pollard 2002), the other Tetum variants
and even the local languages will be swept out. Ongoing research has acknowledged such a
scenario to be emerging in the Lautem District.
To counter this INL preliminarily devised the Tasi-feto programme in which foreign
universities are invited to document the oral traditions of an East Timorese language under
auspices of INL.
28
Documenting the remaining oral traditions is of paramount importance to

27
For an elaboration of Portuguese and its role within East Timorese history and its re-introduction refer to
(Hull 2002a), Kstner (2004) and Thomaz (1985).
28
The Fataluku Language Project is the first project in this programme (see also note 24).
17
make East Timorese society aware of the cultural wealth it possesses through its linguistic
diversity. By documenting local stories, myths, songs and poems in indigenous languages and
providing Tetum translations of these texts, East Timor can value its own cultural heritage and
promote it as the East Timorese equivalent to the literary heritage of other languages in the
world.

Bibliography

Abbreviations: SLCET Studies in Languages and Cultures of East Timor, published
from 1998 to 2000 at the University of Western Sydney, Australia and from 2001 at the
National University of East Timor in Dili under the name Estudos de Lnguas e Culturas
de Timor Leste; BKI Bijdragen tot de taal-, land-, en volkenkunde, The Hague, Leiden:
KITLV Press; IJSL International Journal of the Sociology of Language, Berlin: Mouton
de Gruyter.


Alexander Adelaar and Nikolaus P. Himmelmann (eds), 2005, The Austronesian Languages
of Asia and Madagascar, Routledge Language Family Series, London: Routledge.
Badruzah Nasrin, 2003, Bengali as a Symbol of Nationalism: a Sociolinguistic History. MA
Thesis at the University of Amsterdam.
Baker, Allan, 1990, Notes on the Creole Portuguese of Bidau, Journal of Pidgin and Creole
Languages 5(1):1-38.
Berthe, Louis, 1959, Sur quelques distiques Buna (Timor central), BKI 115(4):336-371.
---, 1972, Bei Gua, itinraire des anctres: mythes des Bunaq Timor, Paris: CNRS.
Berthe, Louis and Claudine Berthe-Friedberg, 1978, Comment fut tranche la liane cleste et
autres texts de la literature orale bunaq (Timor, Indnesie), Langues et civilisations s
tradition orale, Paris: SELAF/CNRS.
Blust, Robert, 1993, Central and Central-Eastern Malayo-Polynesian, Oceanic Linguistics
32:241-293.
Brandes, J.L.A., 1884, Bijdrage tot de vergelijkende klankleer der westersche afdeeling van
de Maleisch-Polynesische taalfamilie, Unpublished PhD Thesis at Utrecht University.
Campagnolo, Henri, 1973, La langue des Fataluku de Lrehe (Timor Portugais), Paris:
Unpublished PhD Thesis at Universit Ren Descartes.
---, 1979, Fataluku I. Relations et choix (Introduction mthodologique la description dune
langue non-austronsienne de Timor Oriental), Paris: SELAF.
Capell, Arthur, 1943-44, Peoples and Languages of Timor, Oceania 14(3):191-219,
14(4):311-337, 15(1):19-48.
Carvalho, Maria Jos Albarran de, 2001, Timor Lorosae: Caractersticas das Lnguas
Crioulas e do Portugus Conservado na Zona. Contribuio para a Lngua Oficial, SLCET
4: 20-36.
Corte-Real, Benjamim Ajaro e, 1998, Mambai and its Verbal Art Genre: A Cultural
Reflection of Suru-Ainaro, East Timor, unpublished PhD Thesis at Macquarie
University, Sydney, Australia.
---, 2000, Social Order and Linguistic Symmetry: The case of Mambai, Suru-Ainaro,
SLCET 3:31-56.
Costa, Lus, 2000, Dicionrio de Ttum-Portugus, Lisbon: Colibri.
Diocese of Dili Liturgical Commission, 1980, Ordinrio da Missa: Texto Oficial Ttum, Dili.
Duarte, Jorge Barros, 1984,Timor: Ritos e mitos ataros, Lisbon: Instituto de Cultura e
Lngua Portuguesa, Ministrio da Educao.
18
Eccles, Lance, 2000, East Timorese Language Policy and the Policies of Other Small Pacific
Nations, SLCET 3:1-30.
Engelenhoven, Aone van, 1997, Words and Expressions: notes on parallelism in Leti,
Cakalele Maluku Research Journal 8:1-25.
---, 2004, Leti, a language of Southwest Maluku, VKI 211, Leiden: KITLV Press.
--- , forthcoming, East Nusantara (East Indonesia and East Timor): Linguistic description on
the verge of extinction and oblivion, in: Pierre Siguret (ed.) Papers from the International
Congress on Endangered Languages, October 15
th
2004, Sydney, Nova Scotia.
Fishman, Joshua, 1967, Bilingualism with and without diglossia; diglossia with and without
bilingualism, Journal of Social Issues 23(2):29-38.
Fox, James J., 2005,Ritual languages, special registers and speech decorum in Austronesian
languages, in: Adelaar and Himmelmann (eds), pp. 87-109.
FRETILIN Literacy Committee, 1975, Como vamos alfabetizar o nosso povo Mau Bere de
Timor Leste?, Timor Leste No. 6, suplementos 1, 2, 3.
Grupu peskiza lian Waimaa, 2005, Hire alfabetun ene, Baukau: Publicaes Matebian.
Hajek, John and John Bowden, 2002, A phonological oddity in the Austronesian area:
ejectives in Waimoa, Oceanic Linguistics 24:222-224.
Hajek, John, Nikolaus Himmelmann, John Bowden, 2003, Lvaia, an East Timorese
language on the verge of extinction, IJSL 160:155-167.
Hakerek Tetun tuir Banati, Kursu Ortografia Patronizada nian, 2002, Dili: Instituto Nacional
de Lingustica, Universidade Nacional Timor Lorosae.
Himmelmann, Nikolaus and John Hajek, 2001, A Report on the Current Sociolinguistic
Situation in Lautm (East Timor), SLCET 4:88-97.
Hudson, Alan, 2002, Outline of a theory of diglossia, IJSL 157:1-48.
Hull, Geoffrey, 1994, Orientao para a Padronizao da Lngua Ttum, Sydney: Mary
MacKillop Institute of East Timorese Studies, reprinted in 1997 in the MacArthur
Linguistic Series at the University of Western Sydney.
---, 1996, Mai Kolia Tetun. A Beginners Course in Tetum-Praa, The Lingua Franca of East
Timor (Revised Edition), Sydney: Australian Catholic Relief and Australian Catholic
Social Justice Council.
---, 1998, The Basic Lexical Affinities of Timors Austronesian Languages: A Preliminary
Investigation, SLCET 1: 97 202.
---, 1999, Indonesia and East Timor: The Cultural Factors of Incompatibility, SCLET 2:55-
67.
---, 2001a, O Mapa Lingustico de Timor Leste: Uma Orientao Dialectolgica, SLCET 4:
1 11.
---, 2001b, A Morphological Overview of the Timoric Sprachbund, SLCET4: 98-205.
---, 2002a, Timr Lorosae, Identidade, Lian no Poltika Edukasionl/Timor-Leste,
Identidade, Lngua e Poltica Educacional, Lisbon: Instituto Cames.
---, 2002b, Standard Tetum-English Dictionary (3d ed), Sydney: Sebastio Aparcio da Silva
Project, Dili: Instituto Nacional de Lingustica/Universidade Nacional de Timor Lorosae,
originally published in 1999 in Sydney at Allen and Unwin.
---, 2004a, The Languages of East Timor, Some Basic Facts (revised 24.8.2004), retrievable at
http://laurel.ocs.mq.edu.au/~eccles/langs.html
---, 2004b, The Papuan Languages of Timor, SLCETimor 6: 23-99.
Hull, Geoffrey and Sabil Jos Branco, 2003, O Engma da Lngua Lvaia, SLCET 5: 107-
134.
Hull, Geoffrey and Lance Eccles, 2001, Tetum Reference Grammar, Sydney: Sebastio
Aparcio da Silva Project, Dili: Instituto Nacional de Lingustica/Universidade Nacional
19
de Timor Lorosae (Portuguese translation Gramtica da Lngua Ttum, Lisbon: LIDEL,
2004).
Hull, Geoffrey and Toni Pollar, 2002, Disionriu Malaiu-Tetun/Kamus Melayu-Tetun, Dili:
Instituto Nacional de Lingustica, Universidade Nacional Timor Lorosae.
Instituto Nacional de Lingustica, 2003, Badain no Knaar Hanorin Lian iha Timr Lorosae,
retrievable at http://www.shlrc.mq.edu.au/~eccles/stlinl.pdf.
---, 2004, The Standard Orthography of the Tetum Language, 115 Years in the Making
retrievable at http://www.shlrc.mq.edu.au/~eccles/orthhist.pdf.
Klinken, Catharina, 1999, Writing Tetun-Prasa: A Communication Challenge, SLCET
2:14-21.
Kstner, Dietrich, 2004, Poltica Lingustica de Timor-Leste: A Reintroduo do Portugus
como Lingua Oficial e de Ensino, SLCET 6: 1-7.
Lameiras-Campagnolo, Maria-Olmpia & Henri Campagnolo, 1979, Rythmes et genres dans
la litterature orale des Fataluku de Lorehe (Timor Oriental) (1re partie), Asie Sud-Est et
Monde Insulindien X (2-3-4): 19-48.
Lennox, Rowena, 2000, Fighting Spirit of East Timor. The Life Martinho da Costa Lopes,
Annandale, NSW: Pluto Press.
Loven, Klarijn, 2004, Si Doel and Beyond: Discourse on Indonesian Television in the 1990s,
unpublished PhD Thesis at Leiden University.
Matadalan Ortogrfiku ba Tetun-Prasa, 2002, Dili: Instituto Nacional de Lingustica,
Universidade Nacional Timor Lorosae.
McWilliam, Andrew, 2005, Austronesians in Linguistic Disguise. Fataluku Cultural Blending
in East Timor. IIAS Lecture at Leiden University, March 9
th
, 2005.
Middelkoop, Pieter, 1949, Een studie van het Timoreesche Doodenritueel, Verhandelingen
van het Bataviaasch Genootschap 76, Bandoeng; A.C.Nix and Co.
Myers-Scotton, Carol, 2002, Contact Linguistics, Bilingual Encounters and Grammatical
Outcomes, Oxford Linguistics, Oxford University Press.
Ramos-Horta, Jos, 1987, Funu, The Unfinished Saga of East Timor, Trenton, NJ: The Red
Sea Press, Inc.
Sa, Artur Baslio de, 1952, Notas sobre lingustica timorense: Sistema de representao
fontica, Estudos Coloniais 3(1-2): 39-60.
---, 1961, Textos em Teto da Literatura Oral Timorense, Volume I, Estudos de cincias
polticas e sociais No. 45, Lisbon: Junta de Investigaes do Ultramar, Centro de Estudos
Polticos e Sociais.
Saunders, George, 2002/3, Comparative Vocabulary of the Naueti Dialect, SCLET 5:79-
106.
Silva, Grgorio Fereirra da, 1999, Language as an Index of Identity, SCLET 2:8-13.
Smyth, Pat, 1999, The Role of the Church in East Timor: Resistance and Reconciliation,
SCLET 2:99-120.
Steinhauer, Hein, 2000, Indonesisch en de Indonesische streektalen, inaugural speech at The
Catholic University of Nijmegen.
Steinhauer, Hein, 2005, Colonial history and language policy in Insular Southeast Asia and
Madagascar, in Adelaar and Himmelmann (eds), pp. 65-86.
Therik, T., 2004, Wehali, The Female Land: Traditions of a Timorese ritual centre, Canberra:
Pandanus Books.
Thomaz, Luis Filipe F.R., 1974, Timor: notas histrico-lingusticas, Portugaliae Historica:
Revista do Instituto Dom Henrique da Faculdade de Letras da universidade de Lisboa vol
II:167-300.
20
---, 1981, The formation of Tetun-Praa, vehicular language of East Timor, in N. Philips and
A. Khaidir (eds), pp. 54-83, Papers on Indonesian Languages and Literatures, Cahier
dArchipel 13, Paris: Indonesian Etymological Project, Association Archipel.
---, 1985, A Lngua Portuguesa em Timor, Congresso sobre a situao actual da lingua
Portuguesa no Mundo Vol. I:313-338.
Traube, Elisabeth, 1980, Mambai Rituals of Black and White, in: James J. Fox (ed.) The
Flow of Life: Essays on Eastern Indonesia, pp. 290-314, Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard
University Press.
---, 1986, Cosmology and Social Life: Ritual Exchanges among the Mambai, Chicago:
University of Chicago Press.
Troeboes et al., 1987, Struktur bahasa Tetum, Jakarta: Departemen Pendidikan dan
Kebudayaan.
What is FRETILIN? The Revolutionary Front of Independent East Timor (FRETILIN)
explains its aims in a question and answer format , 1974, Sydney: the Campaign for
Independent East Timor.
Williams-van Klinken, Catharina, John Hajek and Rachel Nordlinger, 2002, Tetun Dili: A
grammar of an East Timorese language. Shorter Grammars, Pacific Linguistics 528.