Research

 Notes:  Ọbazẹẹ,  A  New  Ẹdo  Dictionary 142  

 

A NEW ẸDO-ENGLISH DICTIONARY

Gabriel O. Ọbazẹẹ.
Independent Researcher,
Benin City, Nigeria.

When in 1986 the dictionary currently in use—An Ẹdo-English Dictionary, by

Professor R. N. Aghẹyisi—was published, a yawning vacuum was filled to the
enthusiastic admiration and acceptance of the public. About a decade later, it
gradually dawned on many people that the dictionary was very small, both in
content and scope, and a call for a bigger dictionary emerged. The need for a new
dictionary became topical. In addition, some began to call for a monolingual
dictionary. Despite this need, no individual or group instantly answered the clarion
call for a new dictionary.

However, some efforts were being made all the while. One attempt was
made by an officer of the Ẹdo Zonal Office, National Council for Arts and Culture,
who initiated a group of three people to work on a monolingual dictionary.
Although the group worked very hard, the proposed dictionary never saw the light
of day. One reason for the failure was the group’s very slow pace of work, which
arose from the difficulty of finding appropriate Ẹdo words to explain the vocabulary
in the lexicon. When a language has as small a volume of vocabulary as the Ẹdo
language has, finding adequate words to facilitate description of words in that
same language becomes problematic. This is because no language is bigger than
its culture.

I served on the committee of three sponsored by the National Council for

Arts and Culture and saw the problems firsthand. All the same, the urgent need to
have an enlarged dictionary persistently obsessed my mind. Knowing the
problems of a monolingual dictionary, I decided to embark on writing a bilingual

 
 Umẹwaẹn: Journal of Benin and Ẹdo Studies, Vol.1, 2016 143  
 

one, with Ẹdo words explained in English. Still, the fear created by the experience
I have described delayed my commencement of the work.

Apart from the problems associated with writing a monolingual dictionary,

the level of readership in the language needs to be considered. Obviously, the
readership who can maximally utilize a monolingual dictionary is negligible, and
such a dictionary might therefore find usefulness only in the libraries. Therefore,
this bilingual dictionary is intended to be useful to the general readership. It is
designed to meet the need of those who are well grounded in the language, who
will find the book to be a handy reference lexicon. Those interested in learning the
language will find the book to be a compendium of Ẹdo vocabulary. Its purpose is
to fill the gap that resulted from the inadequacies of the older dictionaries. For
example, the Melzian dictionary was written with phonetic symbols that make
many people unable to use it. Aghẹyisi’s dictionary, although simple enough to
attract more readership, is obviously small in content.

I started writing this dictionary in Canada about a year ago because I have
the time and an environment conducive to the work. Nonetheless, as a solitary
author, I have no one to consult in the face of many problems. Be that as it may, I
find Agheyisi’s Ẹdo-English Dictionary and Melzian’s Concise Dictionary of the
Bini Language of Southern Nigeria very handy. These two dictionaries have
become my springboard in terms of vocabulary acquisition and grammatical
references.

In regard to the dictionary, the issue of nomenclature needs to be clarified.

For some decades now, Ẹdo as a nomenclature has assumed several linguistic
and political dimensions. In spite of this development, people from the Benin area
of Ẹdo State know nothing more than that they speak Ẹdo and that they are
Ivbiẹdo, Ẹdo people. Their counterparts from outside this area of the state may
agree that they are Ẹdo people, but they do not speak Ẹdo. This, in a nutshell,
explains the scenario. For the former, Ẹdo is a linguistic identification, but for the
latter Ẹdo is a political identity.

 
 
Research  Notes:  Ọbazẹẹ,  A  New  Ẹdo  Dictionary 144  
 

Therefore, Ẹdo as a label for the new dictionary is confined to its linguistic
scope, as the target audience of the book are those who speak the language. The
dictionary will, I believe, help native speakers of the language update and
increase their Ẹdo vocabulary. This is in no way saying that the dictionary has no
relevance to nonspeakers of the language. In fact, the dictionary’s being bilingual
makes it comprehensible to people interested in learning the Ẹdo language.

All things being equal, the book should go to press before the end of 2016.
If it does, it will improve significantly on the existing dictionaries. For the first time,
word entries are tone marked directly on the words for ease of pronunciation.
Therefore, ambiguity arising from the absence of tone marks is resolved without
strains. At about one thousand pages in length, the dictionary will feature many
meaningful words that have long been abandoned for lack of use. My personal
knowledge as both a native speaker of Ẹdo and a linguist facilitates the choice of
entry words. A target of about thirty thousand entry words is anticipated. Most of
the entry words have been gleaned from current usage. Many words, of course,
also come from the old stock. For example, the names of all the Ogisos and Ọbas
and their dates of reign are included. The names of heroes past, particularly those
deified, are highlighted. Also, the names of important and useful trees and weeds,
with their botanical labels in many cases, are featured in the lexicon.

For a long time, the problem of an acceptable orthography has been with
us. However, with some few exceptions, the 1974 recommended orthography has
come to be generally accepted. The orthography adopted for this dictionary is
Aghẹyisi’s version of 1974 text, with one exception having to do with the status of
/mw/. In this dictionary /mw/ is accorded a full-fledged nasal status, as /m/ and /n/.
The effect of this is that there is no /n/ after /mw/. To do the opposite is to assume
that /vb/ and /mw/ have the same sound quality. For example, /ọmwan/ in the
existing dictionary is written as /ọmwa/ in the new dictionary. This change allows
the new dictionary to comply with the linguistic rule requiring every symbol used in
writing a language to be specific. That is to say that a symbol must represent one
and only one sound.

 
 Umẹwaẹn: Journal of Benin and Ẹdo Studies, Vol.1, 2016 145  
 

Most of the words in this lexicon are labelled according to their grammatical
categories. Each word can be distinguished by the function it performs in the
sentence. The nominals, or nouns, are very easy to recognise, as they all begin
with vowels. In addition, they function in the sentence as subjects and objects of
the verbs. Examples are as follows: (1) Owa na mose = ‘this house is fine’; owa is
the subject of the verb mose. (2) Ẹde dẹe owa = ‘Ẹde bought a house’; owa is the
object of the verb dẹe.

Two types of nouns are identifiable in the lexicon. The first group of nouns I
call concrete nouns, and the second group I refer to as derived nouns. Concrete
nouns are not derived from other categories of words. Examples are such words
as obọ = ‘hand’; owa = ‘house’; aga = ‘chair’; ada = ‘sceptre’; ẹghẹ = ‘time’. The
second group of nouns are those derived from other grammatical categories of
words.

One group of derived nouns is made of nouns derived from verbs.

Examples are words such as (1) itota = ‘sitting’, derived from tota = ‘to sit down’,
and (2) irriemwi = ‘eating’, derived from rriemwi = ‘to eat’. Another group of
derived nouns are formed from adjectives and adverbs. Examples are words such
as (1) imose = ‘beauty’, derived from mose = ‘beautiful’, and (2) ikhọrhiọn =
‘ugliness’, derived from khọrhiọn = ‘ugly’. A third category of nouns, which I refer
to as phrasal nouns, are derived from phrases. Examples are (1) irriakọn =
‘grinding of teeth’, derived from rriakọn = ‘to grind teeth’, and (2) ibalegbe = ‘a
quick temper’, derived from balegbe’ = ‘to be quick tempered’. Adjectives can also
be derived from verbs, for example, (1) nọfuọfua = ‘white one’, derived from
fuọfua = ‘to be white’, and (2) nekhui = ‘black one’, derived from khuikhui = ‘to be
black’.

Pronouns in the language are used in places of nouns. Like the nouns,
they function as subjects and objects of verbs in the sentence. They also begin
with vowels. Examples are iran = ‘they’; ima = ‘us’; uwa = ‘you’ (pl.); uwẹ = ‘you’
(sing.); imẹ = ‘me’; and irẹn = ‘him/her/it’. Pronouns can be single letters too.
Examples are I = ‘I’; u = ‘you’ (sing.); and ọ = ‘he/she/it’.

 
 
Research  Notes:  Ọbazẹẹ,  A  New  Ẹdo  Dictionary 146  
 

The verbs in the language describe the action done by the nouns.
Examples include the following: (1) Uwa rhulẹ = ‘Uwa is running’; rhulẹ describes
what Uwa is doing in the sentence. (2) Osazẹ gbe ebọru = ‘Osazẹ is playing a
ball’; gbe says what Osazẹ is doing in the sentence. Adjectives in the language
describe the nouns and pronouns, and adverbs describe the actions in the
sentence. An example of an adjective is gẹdẹgbẹ in the sentence Owa mwẹ ye
gẹdẹgbẹ = ‘my house is big’; gẹdẹgbẹ = ‘big’, describing ‘my house’. An example
of an adverb is gbuu in Odẹ tu gbuu = ‘Odẹ is crying loudly’; gbuu = ‘loudly’,
describing the manner of crying.

Adjectives can also be derived from verbs, as follows: (1) nọfua = ‘white
one’, derived from fuọfua = ‘to be white’, and (2) nekhui = ‘black one’, derived
from khuikhui = ‘to be black’. The verbs, adjectives, and adverbs are generally
easy to identify in the lexicon because they do not begin with vowels. Most of the
adjectives and adverbs are idiophones; that it, their sounds tend to suggest their
meanings.

The most outstanding aspect of this new dictionary is that for the first time,
the plural forms of nouns are indicated. Also, the past tense forms of verbs are
prescribed, and in addition, where it applies, the plural forms of verbs are also
given. The meanings of many words, particularly the verbs, are illustrated in
sentences for ease of comprehension. A lot more will be discovered in the
dictionary, God willing.

REFERENCES

Rebecca Agheyisi Edo-English Dictionary (Benin City: Ethiope Publishing

Corporation, 1985).
Hans Joachim. Melzian’s Concise Dictionary of the Bini Language of Southern
Nigeria, (London: K. Paul, Trench, Trubner and Co. Ltd, 1937)