|
|
|
|
Yeniseian languages
|
| |
|
| |
The Yeniseian language family (sometimes known as Yeniseic or Yenisei-Ostyak; occasionally spelt with -ss-) is spoken in central Siberia.
b>Proto-Yeniseian (before 500 BC; split around 1 AD)
- 1. Northern Yeniseian (split around 700 AD)
1.1. Ket (100-500 speakers)
1.2. Yugh † (2 or 3 non-fluent speakers in 1991)
- 2.

Discussion
Ask a question about 'Yeniseian languages'
Start a new discussion about 'Yeniseian languages'
Answer questions from other users
|
Encyclopedia
The Yeniseian language family (sometimes known as Yeniseic or Yenisei-Ostyak; occasionally spelt with -ss-) is spoken in central Siberia.
Family division
0. Proto-Yeniseian (before 500 BC; split around 1 AD)
- 1. Northern Yeniseian (split around 700 AD)
1.1. Ket (100-500 speakers)
1.2. Yugh † (2 or 3 non-fluent speakers in 1991)
- 2. Southern Yeniseian †
2.1. Kott-Assan (split around 1200 AD)
2.1.1. Kott † (extinct by the mid-1800s)
2.1.2. Assan † (extinct by 1800)
2.2. Arin-Pumpokol (split around 550 AD)
2.2.1. Arin † (extinct by 1800)
2.2.2. Pumpokol † (extinct by 1750)
Only two languages of this family survived into the 20th century, Ket (also known as Imbat Ket), with around 1,000 speakers and Yugh (also known as Sym Ket), which is now possibly extinct. The other known members of this family, Arin, Assan, Pumpokol, and Kott, have been extinct for over a century. Other groups – Buklin, Baikot, Yarin, Yastin – are identifiable as Yeniseic-speaking from tsarist fur-tax records compiled during the 17th century, but nothing remains of their languages except a few proper names. It appears from Chinese sources that a Yeniseian group might have been among the peoples that made up the tribal confederation known as the Xiongnu, who have traditionally been considered the ancestors of the Huns, but these suggestions are difficult to substantiate due to the paucity of data.
Family features
The Yeniseian languages share many contact-induced similarities with the South Siberian Turkic languages, Samoyedic languages, and Evenki. These include long-distance nasal harmony, deaffrication, and the use of postpositions or grammatical enclitics as clausal subordinators. Yeniseic nominal enclitics closely approximate the case systems of geographically contiguous families.
The Yeniseian languages have been described as having up to four tones or no tones at all. The 'tones' are concomitant with glottalization, vowel length, and breathy voice, not unlike the situation reconstructed for Old Chinese before the development of true tones in Chinese. The Yeniseian languages have highly elaborate verbal morphology, to an extreme found elsewhere in Eurasia only in Burushaski and, to a lesser extent, in the Languages of the Caucasus (all of these languages are ergative as well).
Morphology
Personal pronouns
| Personal pronouns in Yeniseian languages |
|---|
| | 1S | 2S | 3MS | 3FS | 1P | 2P | 3AP |
|---|
| Ket | a?(t) | u? | bu? | bu? | ?¯?t ~ ?´tn | ?´k? | bu?? |
|---|
| Yugh | at | u | bu | bu | ?´tn | k?´k? | béì? |
|---|
| Kott dialects | ai | au | uju ~ hatu | uja ~ hata | ajo? | auo? ~ ao? | unia? ~ hatien |
|---|
| Assan | aj | au | bari | ? | aju? | avun | hatin |
|---|
| Arin | ai | au | au | ? | ai? | a? | ita? |
|---|
| Pumpokol | ad | u | adu | ? | ad?? | aja? | ? |
|---|
|
Vocabulary
Numerals
The following table exemplifies the basic Yeniseian numerals as well as the various attempts at reconstructing the proto-forms:
| Gloss | Yeniseian languages and dialects | Available reconstructions |
|---|
| Northern branch | Southern branch |
|---|
| Ket dialects | Yugh | Kott-Assan | Arin-Pumpokol |
|---|
| SK | Kott | Assan | Arin | Pumpokol | Starostin |
|---|
| 1 | qu?s | ?us | hu?t?a | hut?a | qusej | xuta | *xu-sa |
|---|
| 2 | ?¯?n | ?¯n | i?na | ina | kina | hin?a? | *x?na |
|---|
| 3 | d??? | d??? | to??a | ta?a | t?o?a ~ t?u??a | dónga | *do??a |
|---|
| 4 | si?k | sik | t?ega ~ ?e?ga | ?ega | t?aga | ziang | *si- |
|---|
| 5 | qa?k | ?ak | kega ~ ?e?ga | kega | qala | hejla? | *qä- |
|---|
| 6 | a? ~ à | à? | ?elut?a | gejlut?a | ?ga | agg?a? | *?a?V |
|---|
| 7 | ??? | ??? | ?elina | gejlina | ?n?a | on?a? | *?o?n- |
|---|
| 10 | q?¯? | ??¯ | ha?ga ~ haga | xaha | qau ~ hioga | haja? | *??Ga |
|---|
| 20 | ??k | ??k | i?nt?uk? | inkukn | kinthju? | hédiang | *?e?k ~ xe?k |
|---|
| 100 | ki? | ki? | uja?x | jus | jus | útamssa | *ki? ~ gi? / *?alVs-(tamsV) |
|---|
|
A few etymologies
The following table exemplifies a few basic vocabulary items as well as the various attempts at reconstructing the proto-forms:
| Gloss | Yeniseian languages and dialects | Available reconstructions |
|---|
| Northern branch | Southern branch |
|---|
| Ket dialects | Yugh | Kott-Assan | Arin-Pumpokol |
|---|
| SK | NK | CK | Kott | Assan | Arin | Pumpokol | Vajda | Starostin | Werner |
|---|
| LARCH | s??s | s??s | š??š | s??s | šet | cet | cit | tag | *c??ç | *se?s | *s??t / *t??t |
|---|
| RIVER | se?s | se?s | še?š | ses | šet | šet | sat | tat | *ce?c | *ses | *set / *tet |
|---|
| STONE | t??s | t??s | t??š | c??s | šiš | šiš | kes | kit | *c???s | *c??s | *t'??s |
|---|
| FINGER | t??q | t??q | t??q | t??? | t?o? | ? | intoto | tok | *t???q | *t??q | *th??q |
|---|
| RESIN | di?k | di?k | di?k | d?ik | cik | ? | ? | ? | *ci?k | *?ik (~-g, -?) | *d'ik |
|---|
| WOLF | q?¯?t | q?¯?ti | q?¯?t? | ??¯?t | (boru < Turkic) | qut | xotu | *q?i?t?i | *q?te (˜?-) | *q?th? |
|---|
| WINTER | k?¯?t | k?¯?ti | k?¯?te | k?¯?t | ke?t?i | ? | lot | lete | *k?e?t?i | *g?te | *k?te |
|---|
| LIGHT | k??n | k??n | k??n | k??n | kin | ? | lum | ? | *k???n | *g??n- | ? |
|---|
| PERSON | k??d | k??d | k??d | k??t? | hit | het | kit | kit | *k??t | *ke?t | ? |
|---|
| TWO | ?¯?n | ?¯?n | ?¯?n | ?¯n | in | in | kin | hin | *k?i?n | *x?na | *(k)?n |
|---|
| WATER | u?l | u?l | u?l | ur | ul | ul | kul | ul | *k?ul | *qo?l (~?-, -r) | ? |
|---|
| BIRCH | ùs | ù?se | ù?s? | ù??s | uca | uuca | kus | uta | *k?u??a | *xusa | *ku??t'? |
|---|
| SNOWSLED | súùl | súùl | šúùl | s?´ùl | cogar | c?gar | šal | ts?l | *tseh??l | *so?ol | *sog?l (~c/t'-?) |
|---|
|
Proposed relations to other language families
Until 2008, few linguists accepted that connections had been established between Yeniseian and any other language family, though distant connections has been proposed with most of the ergative languages of Eurasia.
Dene-Yenisean
In 2008, Edward Vajda of Western Washington University presented evidence, backed by rigorous methodology, for a genealogical relation between the Yeneisian languages of Siberia and the Na-Dene languages of North America.. His paper has been favorably reviewed by several experts on Na-Dene and Yeniseic languages, including Michael Krauss, Jeff Leer, James Kari, and Heinrich Werner, as well as a number of other well-known linguists, including Bernard Comrie, Johanna Nichols, Victor Golla, Michael Fortescue, and Eric Hamp. However, it will take some time for the linguistic community to properly evaluate this proposal.
Karasuk
The Karasuk hypothesis, linking Yeniseian to Burushaski, has been proposed by several scholars, notably by A.P Dulson and V.N. Toporov. George van Driem, the most prominent current advocate of the Karasuk hypothesis, postulates that the Burusho people were part of the migration out of Central Asia that resulted in the Indo-European conquest of India.
Sino-Tibetan
As noted by Tailleur and Werner, some of the earliest proposals of genetic relations of Yeniseian, by M.A. Castrén (1856), James Byrne (1892), and G.J. Ramstedt (1907), suggested that Yeniseian was a northern relative of the Sino-Tibetan languages. These ideas were followed much later by Kai Donner and Karl Bouda.
Dené-Caucasian
Bouda, in various publications in the 1930s through the 1950s, described a linguistic network that (besides Yeniseian and Sino-Tibetan) also included Caucasian, and Burushaski, some forms of which have gone by the name of Sino-Caucasian. The works of R. Bleichsteiner and O.G. Tailleur, the late Sergei A. Starostin and Sergei L. Nikolayev have sought to confirm these connections. Others who have developed the hypothesis, often expanded to Dené-Caucasian, include J.D. Bengtson, V. Blažek, J.H. Greenberg (with M. Ruhlen), and M. Ruhlen. George Starostin continues his father's work in Yeniseian, Sino-Caucasian and other fields.
External links
-
- by Edward Vajda, a proponent of the Yeniseian-Na-Dene connection.
- by Edward Vajda.
- from the Santa Fe Institute.
- by Merritt Ruhlen.
- by S. A. Starostin.
- ] by S. A. Starostin. 2005.
- ] by S. A. Starostin. 2005.
-
-
Footnotes
|
| |
|
|