العربية
中国
Français
Deutsch
Ελληνική
हिन्दी
Italiano
日本語
Português
Русский
EspañolURALO-SIBERIAN LANGUAGES
'Uralo-Siberian' is a hypothetical language family consisting of Uralic, Yukaghir, Chukotko-Kamchatkan and Eskimo-Aleut. Most linguists still consider this hypothesis speculative and its evidence insufficient to conclusively prove the existence of this family.
Structural similarities between Uralic and Eskimo-Aleut languages
were observed early. In 1746, the Danish theologian Marcus Wöldike
compared Greenlandic to
Hungarian. In 1818, Rasmus Rask considered
Greenlandic to be related to the Uralic languages, and presented
a list of lexical correspondences. (Rask also considered
Uralic and Altaic to be related to each other.) In 1959,
Knut Bergsland published the paper ''The Eskimo-Uralic Hypothesis'',
in which he, like other authors before him, presented a number of
grammatical similarities and a small number of lexical correspondences.
In 1962, Morris Swadesh proposed a relationship between the
Eskimo-Aleut and Chukotko-Kamchatkan language families.
In 1998, Michael Fortescue presented more detailed arguments in his
book, ''Language Relations across Bering Strait''.
The consonant inventories of the reconstructed proto-languages of the four Uralo-Siberian families are very similar to each other. A common feature is that there are only voiceless and no voiced stops, while there is a set of voiced (but no voiceless) non-sibilant fricatives with the same places of articulation (labial, dental, palatal, and velar; in Yukaghir, Chukotko-Kamchatkan and Eskimo-Aleut also uvular). There are also nasals in the same places of articulation. In addition, there are three sibilants, as well as liquids and semivowels.
Apparently shared elements of Uralo-Siberian morphology include
the following:
Proponents of the Nostratic hypothesis consider these apparent correspondences to be evidence in support of the proposed larger Nostratic family.
Fortescue (1998) lists 95 lexical correspondence sets
with reflexes in at least three of the four language families,
and even more shared by two of the languages. Examples are
'
★ ap(p)a' 'grandfather', '
★ kað'a' 'mountain' and
many others.
Fortescue argues that the Uralo-Siberian proto-language (or a complex of related proto-languages) may have been spoken by mesolithic hunting and fishing people in south-central Siberia (roughly, from the upper Yenisei river to Lake Baikal) between 8000 and 6000 BC, and that the proto-languages of the derived families may have been carried northward out of this homeland in several successive waves down to about 4000 BC, leaving the Samoyedic branch of Uralic in occupation of the Urheimat thereafter.
Some or all of the four Uralo-Siberian families have been included in more extensive groupings of languages (see links below). Fortescue's hypothesis does not oppose or exclude these various proposals. In particular, he considers that a remote relationship between Uralo-Siberian and Altaic (or some part of Altaic) is likely. However, Fortescue holds that Uralo-Siberian lies within the bounds of the provable, whereas Nostratic may be too remote a grouping to ever be convincingly demonstrated.
★ Knut Bergsland (1959) The Eskimo-Uralic hypothesis. ''Journal de la Societé Finno-Ougrienne'', 61, 1-29.
★ Michael Fortescue (1998) ''Language Relations across Bering Strait''. ISBN 0-304-70330-3.
★ Künnap, A. (1999). ''Indo-European-Uralic-Siberian linguistic and cultural contacts''. Tartu, Estonia: University of Tartu, Division of Uralic languages.
★ Eurasiatic languages
★ Indo-Uralic languages
★ Nostratic languages
★ Ural-Altaic languages
★ Linguistlist post about Uralo-Eskimo grammar as reconstructed by Uwe Seefloth, who finds Uralic and Eskimo-Aleut to be each other's closest relatives within Uralo-Siberian
★ Discussion of the above and comparisons to Indo-European
★ more discussion of the above
| Contents |
| History |
| Evidence |
| Phonology |
| Morphology |
| Lexicon |
| Urheimat |
| Relationships |
| Sources |
| Further reading |
| See also |
| External links |
History
Structural similarities between Uralic and Eskimo-Aleut languages
were observed early. In 1746, the Danish theologian Marcus Wöldike
compared Greenlandic to
Hungarian. In 1818, Rasmus Rask considered
Greenlandic to be related to the Uralic languages, and presented
a list of lexical correspondences. (Rask also considered
Uralic and Altaic to be related to each other.) In 1959,
Knut Bergsland published the paper ''The Eskimo-Uralic Hypothesis'',
in which he, like other authors before him, presented a number of
grammatical similarities and a small number of lexical correspondences.
In 1962, Morris Swadesh proposed a relationship between the
Eskimo-Aleut and Chukotko-Kamchatkan language families.
In 1998, Michael Fortescue presented more detailed arguments in his
book, ''Language Relations across Bering Strait''.
Evidence
Phonology
The consonant inventories of the reconstructed proto-languages of the four Uralo-Siberian families are very similar to each other. A common feature is that there are only voiceless and no voiced stops, while there is a set of voiced (but no voiceless) non-sibilant fricatives with the same places of articulation (labial, dental, palatal, and velar; in Yukaghir, Chukotko-Kamchatkan and Eskimo-Aleut also uvular). There are also nasals in the same places of articulation. In addition, there are three sibilants, as well as liquids and semivowels.
Morphology
Apparently shared elements of Uralo-Siberian morphology include
the following:
| ' ★ -t' | plural |
| ' ★ -k' | dual |
| ' ★ m-' | 1st person |
| ' ★ t-' | 2nd person |
| ' ★ ka' | interrogative pronoun |
| ' ★ -n' | genitive case |
Proponents of the Nostratic hypothesis consider these apparent correspondences to be evidence in support of the proposed larger Nostratic family.
Lexicon
Fortescue (1998) lists 95 lexical correspondence sets
with reflexes in at least three of the four language families,
and even more shared by two of the languages. Examples are
'
★ ap(p)a' 'grandfather', '
★ kað'a' 'mountain' and
many others.
Urheimat
Fortescue argues that the Uralo-Siberian proto-language (or a complex of related proto-languages) may have been spoken by mesolithic hunting and fishing people in south-central Siberia (roughly, from the upper Yenisei river to Lake Baikal) between 8000 and 6000 BC, and that the proto-languages of the derived families may have been carried northward out of this homeland in several successive waves down to about 4000 BC, leaving the Samoyedic branch of Uralic in occupation of the Urheimat thereafter.
Relationships
Some or all of the four Uralo-Siberian families have been included in more extensive groupings of languages (see links below). Fortescue's hypothesis does not oppose or exclude these various proposals. In particular, he considers that a remote relationship between Uralo-Siberian and Altaic (or some part of Altaic) is likely. However, Fortescue holds that Uralo-Siberian lies within the bounds of the provable, whereas Nostratic may be too remote a grouping to ever be convincingly demonstrated.
Sources
★ Knut Bergsland (1959) The Eskimo-Uralic hypothesis. ''Journal de la Societé Finno-Ougrienne'', 61, 1-29.
★ Michael Fortescue (1998) ''Language Relations across Bering Strait''. ISBN 0-304-70330-3.
Further reading
★ Künnap, A. (1999). ''Indo-European-Uralic-Siberian linguistic and cultural contacts''. Tartu, Estonia: University of Tartu, Division of Uralic languages.
See also
★ Eurasiatic languages
★ Indo-Uralic languages
★ Nostratic languages
★ Ural-Altaic languages
External links
★ Linguistlist post about Uralo-Eskimo grammar as reconstructed by Uwe Seefloth, who finds Uralic and Eskimo-Aleut to be each other's closest relatives within Uralo-Siberian
★ Discussion of the above and comparisons to Indo-European
★ more discussion of the above
This article provided by Wikipedia. To edit the contents of this article, click here for original source.
psst.. try this: add to faves
