Turanian languages

Last updated
Turanian
(obsolete)
Geographic
distribution
Eurasia
Linguistic classification Proposed language family
Subdivisions
Glottolog None

Turanian is an obsolete language-family proposal subsuming most of the languages of Eurasia not included in Indo-European, Semitic and Chinese. During the 19th century, inspired by the establishment of the Indo-European family, scholars looked for similarly widespread families elsewhere. [1] Building on the work of predecessors such as Rasmus Rask and Matthias Castrén, Max Müller proposed the Turanian grouping primarily on the basis of the incidence of agglutinative morphology, naming it after Turan, an ancient Persian term for the lands of Central Asia. [2] [3] The languages he included are now generally assigned to nine separate language families.

Contents

Classification

Map of Eurasia showing the "Altaic" and Uralic language-speaking regions, which are united under the "Turanian" theory. Linguistic map of the Altaic, Turkic and Uralic languages (en).png
Map of Eurasia showing the "Altaic" and Uralic language-speaking regions, which are united under the "Turanian" theory.

In 1730, von Strahlenberg, relying on structural similarities of languages, proposed a group of "Tatar languages" spanning northern and central Eurasia and the languages of the Caucasus. In 1832, Rask added Basque and languages of Greenland and North America to von Strahlenberg's grouping, labelling the resulting group the "Scythian languages". [3] [4] Rask also added the Dravidian languages to this grouping on the basis of similarities in grammatical structure, postulating that the Scythian languages had once stretched from the Arctic Ocean to the Indian Ocean before being split by the intrusion of Indo-Aryan languages. [5] [6]

Müller added even more languages to this group. [3] [7] He viewed the structure of the family as follows: [8] [9]

He left Japonic, Koreanic, Koryak, Itelmen and various languages of the Caucasus unclassified, but suggested that they might have a common origin with Turanian. [10] He preferred to call Turanian a "language group", feeling that that it was less tightly bound than "language families" like Indo-European and Semitic. [7]

Reception

Linguists no longer consider typological features a sufficient criterion for the identification of language families. [11] Such features are commonly shared by unrelated languages across the world, and also spread by interaction between unrelated languages. [12]

The proposal of a relationship between Ural-Altaic and Dravidian persisted in some late 19th century scholarship, but in the absence of further development, was considered an idle hypothesis already by the early 20th. [13] The Ural-Altaic hypothesis was itself abandoned early in the 20th century. [14] The Altaic theory linking Tungusic, Mongolic and Turkic is also rejected by most scholars. [15] The combination of the Samoyedic and Finnic (Finno-Ugric) classes form the modern Uralic family, which is firmly established. [16] Each of the five classes of Müller's southern division are now considered to belong to separate language families, Tai–Kadai, Austronesian, Sino-Tibetan, Austroasiatic and Dravidian respectively.

The term "Turanian" remained for a time also a synonym for the Ural-Altaic hypothesis. [17] [18]

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Altaic languages</span> Hypothetical language family of Eurasia

Altaic is a controversial proposed language family that would include the Turkic, Mongolic and Tungusic language families and possibly also the Japonic and Koreanic languages. The hypothetical language family has long been rejected by most comparative linguists, although it continues to be supported by a small but stable scholarly minority. Speakers of the constituent languages are currently scattered over most of Asia north of 35° N and in some eastern parts of Europe, extending in longitude from the Balkan Peninsula to Japan. The group is named after the Altai mountain range in the center of Asia.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Dravidian languages</span> Language family mostly of southern India

The Dravidian languages are a family of languages spoken by 250 million people, mainly in southern India, north-east Sri Lanka, and south-west Pakistan, with pockets elsewhere in South Asia.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Finno-Ugric languages</span> Subdivision of the Uralic languages

Finno-Ugric is a traditional grouping of all languages in the Uralic language family except the Samoyedic languages. Its formerly commonly accepted status as a subfamily of Uralic is based on criteria formulated in the 19th century and is criticized by some contemporary linguists such as Tapani Salminen and Ante Aikio. The three most spoken Uralic languages, Hungarian, Finnish, and Estonian, are all included in Finno-Ugric.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Nostratic languages</span> Proposed superfamily of Eurasian and African languages

Nostratic is a hypothetical language macrofamily including many of the language families of northern Eurasia first proposed in 1903. Though a historically important proposal, it is now generally considered a fringe theory. Its exact composition varies based on proponent; it typically includes the Kartvelian, Indo-European and Uralic languages; some languages from the similarly controversial Altaic family; the Afroasiatic languages; as well as the Dravidian languages.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Uralic languages</span> Language family of Northern Eurasia

The Uralic languages, sometimes called the Uralian languages, form a language family of 42 languages spoken predominantly in Europe and North Asia. The Uralic languages with the most native speakers are Hungarian, Finnish, and Estonian. Other languages with speakers above 100,000 are Erzya, Moksha, Mari, Udmurt and Komi spoken in the European parts of the Russian Federation. Still smaller minority languages are Sámi languages of the northern Fennoscandia; other members of the Finnic languages, ranging from Livonian in northern Latvia to Karelian in northwesternmost Russia; and the Samoyedic languages, Mansi and Khanty spoken in Western Siberia.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Ural-Altaic languages</span> Abandoned language family proposal

Ural-Altaic, Uralo-Altaic, Uraltaic, or Turanic is a linguistic convergence zone and abandoned language-family proposal uniting the Uralic and the Altaic languages. It is now generally agreed that even the Altaic languages do not share a common descent: the similarities between Turkic, Mongolic and Tungusic are better explained by diffusion and borrowing. Just as in Altaic, the internal structure of the Uralic family has been debated since the family was first proposed. Doubts about the validity of most or all of the proposed higher-order Uralic branchings are becoming more common. The term continues to be used for the central Eurasian typological, grammatical and lexical convergence zone.

Turan is a historical region in Central Asia. The term is of Iranian origin and may refer to a particular prehistoric human settlement, a historic geographical region, or a culture. The original Turanians were an Iranian tribe of the Avestan age.

In historical linguistics, the homeland or Urheimat of a proto-language is the region in which it was spoken before splitting into different daughter languages. A proto-language is the reconstructed or historically-attested parent language of a group of languages that are genetically related.

Mass comparison is a method developed by Joseph Greenberg to determine the level of genetic relatedness between languages. It is now usually called multilateral comparison. Mass comparison has been referred to as a "methodological deception" and is rejected by most linguists, and its continued use is primarily restricted to fringe linguistics.

Comparative linguistics is a branch of historical linguistics that is concerned with comparing languages to establish their historical relatedness.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Turanism</span> Pseudoscientific pan-nationalist movement

Turanism, also known as pan-Turanism or pan-Turanianism, is a pan-nationalist political movement built around pseudoscientific claims of biological and linguistic connections between various ethnic groups of Eurasia. It revolves around the abandoned proposal of a Ural-Altaic language family, which hypothesizes that the Turkic, Mongolic, Tungusic, and Uralic peoples share Inner and Central Asian origins and therefore close cultural, ethnic, and linguistic bonds. Supporters of Turanism propose political unity among these groups, chiefly to oppose the cultural and political influences of the Indo-Europeans of Europe and South Asia, as well as the Sino-Tibetans of East Asia. The movement emerged in the 19th century to counter pan-nationalist ideologies such as pan-Germanism, and built upon the ideas of pan-Slavism.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Eurasiatic languages</span> Proposed language macrofamily

Eurasiatic is a hypothetical and controversial language macrofamily proposal that would include many language families historically spoken in northern, western, and southern Eurasia.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Indo-Uralic languages</span> Controversial hypothetical language family consisting of Indo-European and Uralic

Indo-Uralic is a highly controversial linguistic hypothesis proposing a genealogical family consisting of Indo-European and Uralic.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Uralo-Siberian languages</span> Proposed language family including Uralic, Yukaghir, Eskimo–Aleut and possibly Nivkh

Uralo-Siberian is a hypothetical language family consisting of Uralic, Yukaghir, and Eskaleut. It was proposed in 1998 by Michael Fortescue, an expert in Eskaleut and Chukotko-Kamchatkan, in his book Language Relations across Bering Strait. Some have attempted to include Nivkh in Uralo-Siberian. Until 2011, it also included Chukotko-Kamchatkan. However, after 2011 Fortescue only included Uralic, Yukaghir and Eskaleut in the theory, although he argued that Uralo-Siberian languages have influenced Chukotko-Kamchatkan.

The classification of the Japonic languages and their external relations is unclear. Linguists traditionally consider the Japonic languages to belong to an independent family; indeed, until the classification of Ryukyuan and eventually Hachijō as separate languages within a Japonic family rather than as dialects of Japanese, Japanese was considered a language isolate.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Colin Masica</span> American scholar of Indo-Aryan languages (1931–2022)

Colin Paul Masica was an American linguist who was professor emeritus in the Department of South Asian Languages and Civilizations and the Department of Linguistics at the University of Chicago. Besides being a specialist in Indo-Aryan languages, much of his work was on the typological convergence of languages belonging to different linguistic families in the South Asian area and beyond, more broadly on this phenomenon in general, and on possible explanations for it and implications of it in connection with both linguistic and cultural history.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Proto-Uralic homeland</span> Hypothesized location where the Proto-Uralic language originated

The Proto-Uralic homeland is the hypothetical place where speakers of the Proto-Uralic language lived in a single linguistic community, or complex of communities, before this original language dispersed geographically and divided into separate distinct languages.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Ainu languages</span> Language family of northern Japan and neighboring islands

The Ainu languages, sometimes known as Ainuic, are a small language family, often regarded as a language isolate, historically spoken by the Ainu people of northern Japan and neighboring islands.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Josef Budenz</span> German linguist

Josef Budenz was a German comparative linguist specializing in Finno-Ugric who researched the origins of the Hungarian language.

References

  1. Bhattacharya 1972, p. 242.
  2. Müller (1861), pp. 288–289.
  3. 1 2 3 Campbell & Poser (2008), p. 237.
  4. Poppe (1965), p. 125.
  5. Krishnamurti (2003), p. 5.
  6. Rask (1834), p. 525.
  7. 1 2 Poppe (1965), p. 126.
  8. Müller (1854), p. 220.
  9. Müller (1861), pp. 397–398.
  10. Müller (1861), p. 324.
  11. Campbell & Poser (2008), p. 242.
  12. Campbell & Poser (2008), p. 236.
  13. Donner, Otto (1901). "Die uralaltaischen sprachen". Finnisch-Ugrische Forschungen. 1: 130.
  14. Campbell & Poser (2008), p. 241.
  15. Campbell & Poser (2008), p. 238.
  16. Campbell & Poser (2008), pp. 88–94.
  17. Lucien, Adam (1870). "Linguistique touranienne. Du theme du pronom de la 1re personne". Revue de Linguistique et de Philologie comparée. 4: 29–40.
  18. Pröhle, Wilhelm (1978). Vergleichende Syntax der ural-altäischen (turanischen) Sprachen. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.

Works cited