Dené–Caucasian languages explained

Dené–Caucasian
Acceptance:widely rejected
Region:scattered in Eurasia and North America
Familycolor:superfamily
Family:Hypothetical language family
Child1:Na-Dené (including Haida)
Child2:Yeniseian
Child3:North Caucasian
Child4:Sino-Tibetan
Child5:Burushaski
Child6:Vasconic
Child7:Tyrsenian (sometimes included)
Child8:Sumerian (sometimes included)
Child9:Almosan (rarely included)
Glotto:none
Map:Dené-Caucasian.JPG

Dené–Caucasian is a discredited language family proposal that includes widely-separated language groups spoken in the Northern Hemisphere: Sino-Tibetan languages, Yeniseian languages and Burushaski in Asia; Na-Dené languages in North America; as well as Vasconic languages (including Basque) and North Caucasian languages from Europe.

A narrower connection specifically between North American Na-Dené and Siberian Yeniseian (the Dené–Yeniseian languages hypothesis) was proposed by Edward Vajda in 2008, and has met with some acceptance within the community of professional linguists. The validity of the rest of the family, however, is viewed as doubtful or rejected by nearly all historical linguists.[1] [2] [3] [4] [5]

History of the hypothesis

Classifications similar to Dené–Caucasian were put forward in the 20th century by Alfredo Trombetti, Edward Sapir, Robert Bleichsteiner, Karl Bouda, E. J. Furnée, René Lafon, Robert Shafer, Olivier Guy Tailleur, Morris Swadesh, Vladimir N. Toporov, and other scholars.

Morris Swadesh included all of the members of Dené–Caucasian in a family that he called "Basque-Dennean" (when writing in English, 2006/1971: 223) or "vascodene" (when writing in Spanish, 1959: 114). It was named for Basque and Navajo, the languages at its geographic extremes. According to Swadesh (1959: 114), it included "Basque, the Caucasian languages, Ural-Altaic, Dravidian, Tibeto-Burman, Chinese, Austronesian, Japanese, Chukchi (Siberia), Eskimo-Aleut, Wakash, and Na-Dene", and possibly "Sumerian".[6] Swadesh's Basque-Dennean thus differed from Dené–Caucasian in including (1) Uralic, Altaic, Japanese, Chukotian, and Eskimo-Aleut (languages which are classed as Eurasiatic by the followers of Sergei Starostin and those of Joseph Greenberg), (2) Dravidian, which is classed as Nostratic by Starostin's school, and (3) Austronesian (which according to Starostin is indeed related to Dené–Caucasian, but only at the next stage up, which he termed Dené–Daic, and only via Austric (see Starostin's Borean macrofamily). Swadesh's colleague Mary Haas attributes the origin of the Basque-Dennean hypothesis to Edward Sapir.

In the 1980s, Sergei Starostin, using strict linguistic methods (proposing regular phonological correspondences, reconstructions, glottochronology, etc.), became the first to put the idea that the Caucasian, Yeniseian and Sino-Tibetan languages are related on firmer ground.[7] In 1991, Sergei L. Nikolaev added the Na-Dené languages to Starostin's classification.[8]

In 1996, John D. Bengtson added the Vasconic languages (including Basque, its extinct relative or ancestor Aquitanian, and possibly Iberian), and in 1997 he proposed the inclusion of Burushaski. The same year, in his article for Mother Tongue, Bengtson concluded that Sumerian might have been a remnant of a distinct subgroup of the Dené–Caucasian languages.[9]

In 1998, Vitaly V. Shevoroshkin rejected the Amerind affinity of the Almosan (Algonquian-Wakashan) languages, suggesting instead that they had a relationship with Dené–Caucasian. Several years later, he offered a number of lexical and phonological correspondences between the North Caucasian, Salishan, and Wakashan languages, concluding that Salishan and Wakashan may represent a distinct branch of North Caucasian and that their separation from it must postdate the dissolution of the Northeast Caucasian unity (Avar-Andi-Tsezian), which took place around the 2nd or 3rd millennium BC.[10]

Academic concerns with Dené–Caucasian

Family tree proposals

Starostin's theory

The Dené–Caucasian family tree and approximate divergence dates (estimated by modified glottochronology) proposed by S. A. Starostin and his colleagues from the Tower of Babel project:[15]

Bengtson's theory

John D. Bengtson groups Basque, Caucasian and Burushaski together in a Macro-Caucasian (earlier Vasco-Caucasian) family (see the section on Macro-Caucasian below).[16] According to him, it is as yet premature to propose other nodes or subgroupings, but he notes that Sumerian seems to share the same number of isoglosses with the (geographically) western branches as with the eastern ones:[17]

Proposed subbranches

Macro-Caucasian

John Bengtson (2008)[18] proposes that, within Dené–Caucasian, the Caucasian languages form a branch together with Basque and Burushaski, based on many shared word roots as well as shared grammar such as:

Karasuk

See main article: Karasuk languages.

George van Driem has proposed that the Yeniseian languages are the closest known relatives of Burushaski, based on a small number of similarities in grammar and lexicon. The Karasuk theory as proposed by van Driem does not address other language families that are hypothesized to belong to Dené–Caucasian,[19] so whether the Karasuk hypothesis is compatible or not with the Macro-Caucasian hypothesis remains to be investigated.

See also

References

Further reading

External links

Notes and References

  1. Book: Past Human Migrations in East Asia: Matching Archaeology, Linguistics and Genetics. 9781134149629. Sanchez-Mazas. Alicia. Blench. Roger. Ross. Malcolm D.. Peiros. Ilia. Lin. Marie. 2008-07-25. Routledge .
  2. [Lyle Campbell|Campbell, Lyle]
  3. [Ives Goddard|Goddard, Ives]
  4. [Larry Trask|Trask, R. L.]
  5. Dalby, Andrew (1998). Dictionary of Languages. New York: Columbia University Press. pg. 434
  6. Book: Tras la huella lingüística de la prehistoria. 9789683603685. Swadesh. Mauricio. 1987.
  7. See Starostin 1984, Starostin 1991
  8. See Nikola(y)ev 1991
  9. See Bengtson 1996, Bengtson 1997, Bengtson 1997
  10. See Shevoroshkin 1998, Shevoroshkin 2003, and Shevoroshkin 2004
  11. See Starostin 1994
  12. See Peiros & Starostin 1996
  13. See Handel 1998
  14. See Werner 2004
  15. See The preliminary phylogenetic tree according to the Tower of Babel Project
  16. See Bengtson 1997a
  17. See Bengtson 1997b
  18. See Bengtson 2008
  19. See Van Driem 2001