In our talk, we present an overview of backchanneling devices as they are attested in interactive language data from the Ethiopian language Kambaata (Cushitic). Backchannels signal to interlocutors that one is listening and waiting for them to continue (see, e.g., Dingemanse, Liesenfeld; Woensdregt 2022), and as the proverb in our title (quoted from Alamu & Alamaayyo 2017: 152) is meant to illustrate, Kambaata speakers actually expect their interlocutors to engage in backchanneling when they are speaking. Kambaata backchannels belong to the word class of interjections. In a first step, we identify them in our recorded texts according to their function and distinguish them from other responses (e.g. gárita ‘(it’s) true’, ekku ‘okay, I agree’, ishshi & Amharic loan ‘okay, I agree’). Then we classify them according to their phonetic forms. The following preliminary types are proposed: 1. a closed, nasal mhmm ~ ũhũũ,* 2. an open, nasal ɑ̃ɑ̃ ~ ɑ̃hɑ̃ɑ̃, 3. a front-vowel, non- nasal ee, and, most notably, 4. an ingressive (inhaled) feedback signal [↓] (Eklund 2008) . Our paper tries to formulate hypotheses about their distribution and discusses in how far they are exchangeable or expressions of subtle differences in the type of feedback they provide. The paper is based on recorded, transcribed and translated two- and three-party conversations, about such diverse topics as beekeeping, blessing and cursing traditions, and exchanges about picture stories (cf. Kambaata deposit of Treis 2024-2025). At the moment of writing this abstract, the transcribed sample texts feature altogether 13 different speakers and contain 5221 annotated backchannels.

Note: This talk has not gone through a process of peer review, and findings should therefore be treated as preliminary and subject to change. Acknowledgement and citation: Treis, Yvonne, Yoseph Yonas Zecharias & Teshome Dagne Madebo. 2025. “Speech to which no one says mhmm is an orphan”: Backchanneling in Kambaata conversations. Talk Given at Rift Valley Webinar Series 19/02/2025.