[Note: thIs transcrIptIon was produced by an automatIc OCR engIne]

TABLE or CONTENTS

Foreword......... . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

I.IntroductIon................................................10

I.a The four-sectIon system . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13

I.b SectIon systems and hIstory . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .22

Le HomogeneIty and heterogeneIty In the Western Desert . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30

I.d TheoretIcal consIderatIons on the questIon of dIffusIon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .32

I.e MethodologIcal prelImInarIes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .35

II. The spatIal dIstrIbutIon ofIndIvIdual terms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38

III.ThespatIaldIstrIbutIonofpaIrsofterms.......................42



III.a FIrst hypothesIs: the IdentIty Panaka - YIparrka . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .43

III.b Second hypothesIs: the zone of extensIon and substItutIon of PaljerI . . . . .

IH.c ThIrd hypothesIs: Burgulu may be replaced by MIlangka or YIparrka . . . . . . . . . . .45

IH.d CombInatIons of four categorIes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
IV. The spatIal dIstrIbutIon of logIcal systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52

Na ImpossIble marrIages . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .52

IV.b The PIntupI, or the transItIon fl-om four sectIons to eIght subsectIons . . . . . . . . . . . .53

IV.c Nyangumarta: the Inland and the coastal system . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56

IV.d The case of Laverton: fIrst encounter between Waljen and Mandjmdja . . . . . . . . . . 60

We The case of KalgoorlIe: second encounter between Waljen and MandjIndja . . . . . . . 62

V. The dIffusIon of sectIon names: an overvIew . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65

VI. OrIgIn of sectIon names and language or trIbal names. . . . . . . . . . . . 67

VH. DIstrIbutIonal pattern of alternate generatIonal moIetIes. . . . . . . . . 71

VIII. Why and how dId sectIons dIffuse? A network approach . . . . . . . . 78
VIII.a How dId sectIons dIflIIse; how were they adopted? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78
VIII.b Why were sectIons adopted; why have they dIflIIsed? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82

IX.ConclusIon................................................90



a StatIstIcal tools used . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 94
b StorIes explaInIng the anIval of sectIons In the RawlInson and Warburton Ranges . . 95
c Corpus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .97

ReferencescIted..............................................101