Encyclopedia of arabic language and linguistics pdf


 

PDF | On Jan 1, , C. H. M. Versteegh and others published Encyclopedia of Arabic Language and Linguistics (Vol. II). Encyclopedia of Arabic Language and ruthenpress.info Michael C A Macdonald. M. Macdonald. For the best experience, open this PDF portfolio in Acrobat X or. In Arabic, gender differentiation is based upon grammatical criteria languages, both ancient and modern, namely whether their verbal inferred from the use of a certain linguistic cate- gory or type of . ruthenpress.info Levinson.

Author:GARFIELD GANGEL
Language:English, Spanish, Indonesian
Country:Marshall Islands
Genre:Personal Growth
Pages:701
Published (Last):20.06.2016
ISBN:353-1-37554-190-9
Distribution:Free* [*Register to download]
Uploaded by: LIZBETH

63554 downloads 120276 Views 27.36MB PDF Size Report


Encyclopedia Of Arabic Language And Linguistics Pdf

The Encyclopedia of Arabic Language and Linguistics is a major multi-volume reference work. It is a unique View PDF Flyer. About. Encyclopedia of Arabic Language and Linguistics Online. Editor: Lutz Edzard Contact Sales · Contact Sales · Contact Sales · View PDF Flyer. The Encyclopedia of Arabic Language and Linguistics is a major multi-volume reference work. It is a unique collaboration Add to Cart · View PDF Flyer. About .

All Rights Reserved. Personal use only; commercial use is strictly prohibited for details see Privacy Policy and Legal Notice. The actual number depends on where the line is drawn between language and dialect—an arbitrary decision, because languages are always in flux. But specialists applying a reasonably uniform criterion across the globe count well over 2, languages in Asia and Africa, while Europe has just shy of In between are the Pacific region, with over 1, languages, and the Americas, with just over 1, Languages spoken natively by over a million speakers number around , but the vast majority have very few speakers. Something like half are thought likely to disappear over the next few decades, as speakers of endangered languages turn to more widely spoken ones. The languages of the world are grouped into perhaps language families, based on their origin, as determined by comparing similarities among languages and deducing how they evolved from earlier ones. The figure comes from Glottolog. While it is normal for languages to borrow from other languages, occasionally a totally new language is created by mixing elements of two distinct languages to such a degree that we would not want to identify one of the source languages as the mother tongue. This is what led to the development of Media Lengua, a language of Ecuador formed through contact among speakers of Spanish and speakers of Quechua. In this language, practically all the word stems are from Spanish, while all of the endings are from Quechua.

The standard language of Armenia is in the Eastern Armenian group, which also includes the dialects of Armenian communities in Iran, Russia, Georgia, and their environs.

Texts from Armenian Cilicia from the 11th to the 14th centuries ce are the first to show a differentiated Western dialect. Armenian is of special interest to linguists because of retentions from Indo-European, notably all seven of its noun cases and the irregular retention of initial laryngeals.

These three are traditionally grouped into a branch called Finno-Ugric. See Salminen for arguments. The remaining languages of Uralic are smaller ones found in northern parts of Europe and Asia. This relatively small region may have up to around 40 highly diverse languages, falling into three families, Nakho-Dagestanian, Abkhazo-Adyghean, and Kartvelian.

The most important Nakho-Dagestanian language is Chechen. Abkhaz-Adyghean is made up of Abkhaz and Adyghe and is best known among linguists for systems with 60 or more contrasting consonants but very few vowels. The major Kartvelian language is Georgian, with four million speakers. Its history in this location is widely thought to go back several millennia, antedating the more recent Indo-European migrations to the region.

There have attempts to identify Basque with a wide variety of groups, including Kartvelian, Afro-Asiatic, and Iberian, but without attracting much support. The current count exceeds 2, languages, grouped into just a few families. Many other questions still remain open.

For example, Greenberg recognized Khoisan as a family, but later scholars have tended to set a higher bar for establishing genetic relationships, leading most to reject it as a family and to defer judgment on particular groupings into branches. The unity of Nilo-Saharan is also called into question, and despite detailed comparative work by Bender — and Ehret , some reject Nilo-Saharan as a valid genetic unit.

For Niger-Congo, the status of some member branches—Kordofanian, Mande, Dogon, and Ijoid—has been challenged, though Niger-Congo itself is widely recognized as a valid family. The Afro-Asiatic family is well established, though there are debates about subgrouping.

For example, do Semitic, Berber, and Cushitic together form a separate branch, as Bender — contends? Within Niger-Congo, there are a number of unanswered questions, many revolving around the constituency of its most complex branch, Benue-Congo, which uncontroversially includes all the Bantu languages and many more.

For details and references, see Bendor-Samuel and Hartell and the references in Nordhoff et al. The Semitic branch has 78 languages, including Arabic, the first language of up to million throughout North Africa and widely spoken in the Middle East. Other important Semitic languages are Hebrew, which shares official status in Israel with Arabic, and several Ethiopic languages.

Amharic, the official language of Ethiopia and the first language of 21 million, is a South Ethiopic language. In the North Ethiopic branch is Tigrigna, an official language of Eritrea spoken by 7 million. The term Afro-Asiatic was used by Joseph Greenberg to replace the designation Hamito-Semitic, which posited a division between the Semitic branch named for Biblical figure Shem and a putative branch named for Biblical figure Ham.

Greenberg argued that extraneous factors like these had no place in language classification, which should be based solely on linguistic data. Comparing languages from the different groups classed as Hamitic, Greenberg concluded that the evidence did not support their grouping into a single branch.

The Berber branch of Afro-Asiatic is spoken in the foothills of the Atlas Mountain in Morocco and Algeria and, spottily, in neighboring countries. Cushitic gets its name from Cush, the son of Ham.

The several dozen languages of this group are spoken mainly in Ethiopia and Somalia, with a few in Kenya and Tanzania. Chadic languages are mainly spoken in the countries surrounding Lake Chad and are dominant in northern Nigeria, numbering close to in all. By far the most widely spoken is Hausa, with 25 million native speakers. The languages of the Omotic branch, numbering over two dozen, are all spoken in southwestern Ethiopia. The Egyptian branch, thanks to hieroglyphs, can be traced back before 3, bce.

Ancient Egyptian was the ancestor of Coptic, spoken in Egypt, but over time was replaced by Arabic until Coptic died out, roughly years ago. Since then Coptic has survived as a liturgical language.

For a relatively small family, they are quite diverse typologically, leaving some doubt as to whether the Nilotic and Saharan branches really deserve to be grouped into a family. Reflecting this, Glottolog divides them into two separate families, Nilotic and Saharan. Ideas about the respective genetic affiliations of well-known groups within Niger-Congo have changed substantially over the last half-century. This discovery—which took ten years before gaining the wide acceptance it has today—not only challenged earlier assumptions about linguistic classification but also opened the door to hypotheses about Bantu origins.

The currently accepted view is that Bantu originated in southeastern Nigeria and expanded east and south from there. This is the case with Khoisan, which is generally not recognized as an established family but as a set of 27 languages—some with just a handful of speakers—that are likely not to belong to the other three established families of African languages.

Ermisch presents what is known, along with the residual problems. For more on Malayo-Polynesian, see the subsection on Austronesian in the section on Oceania. The downside is that the contact situation has made it difficult to classify genetic relationships with certainty in some important cases. This section describes the Indo-European languages of Asia. The Tocharian branch became extinct with the expansion of Turkic Uyghur tribes in the 9th century ce.

Tocharian manuscripts from a few centuries prior to extinction, uncovered in the early 20th century, provided information that led scholars to reassess key assumptions about Proto-Indo-European and its descendants. Anatolian inscriptions from a much earlier era, about two millennia prior, similarly reshaped what had been known. Gamkrelidze and Ivanov offer a highly readable synthesis and summary of research presented in Gamkrelidze and Ivanov Among the over two hundred Indo-Aryan languages, Hindi and Urdu are official languages of India and Pakistan, respectively, and many consider them dialects of a single language.

Hindustani is the language once promoted by Gandhi and the Indian National Congress as a tool of national unity. For the Hindustani controversy, see Kachru The largest language of the Iranian component of Indo-Iranian is Persian, with estimates exceeding 50 million native speakers in Iran. Written records of Old Persian go back to the 6th century bce. Other important languages in the Iranian branch are Pashto, mainly spoken in Afghanistan and Pakistan, and Kurdish, mainly spoken in Turkey, Iraq, and Iran.

Despite the vastness of this area, the languages themselves are typologically quite similar: agglutinative, with vowel harmony involving both backness and rounding. Mongolian, with over six million speakers, is by far the largest language in the family and the official language both of Mongolia and of the Inner Mongolian Autonomous Region of China. That includes Manchu, the language of the founders of the Qing Dynasty, which ruled China for nearly three centuries up to The edition of Ethnologue lists only 20 speakers for Manchu, though over ten million are ethnically Manchu.

Altaic has been regarded by some as a family comprising Turkic, Mongolic, and Tungusic, and for a few even including as distant members Japonic and Korean. Versions of the Altaic hypothesis still have adherents, even though this notion has been cast into doubt as criteria have been challenged and evidence has been rejected as based largely on shared typological similarities, a position summarized in Unger Despite this, adherents continue to make a case, among them Miller , Georg et al.

The more conservative consensus is that many resemblances among languages in this linguistic area could have come from language contact rather than a shared ancestor. This view is reflected in Ethnologue and Glottolog, among others. The major literary languages are Tamil, Malayalam, Kannada, and Telugu, each one the first language of tens of millions. More is known about the history of Dravidian than about many other language families, thanks to the long literary periods of the four major languages.

Encyclopedia of Arabic Language and Linguistics

Questions have been raised about Dravidian similarities to Uralic and Altaic, among several others. Austerlitz dismissed these, and Krishnamurti , briefly surveying archeological and DNA literature along with linguistic evidence in his foundational work on Dravidian, seconds the conclusion that the linguistic arguments behind the proposed genetic relationships are tenuous and speculative.

Dravidian morphology is mainly agglutinative but lacks the long strings of affixes found in other agglutinative languages. The typical word order is SOV.

Sanskrit, an Indo-Aryan language, owes its retroflex consonants to Dravidian, from which they are thought to have spread by diffusion. The division into Chinese and Tibeto-Burman branches is customary, as espoused by Matisoff , though a few experts, including van Driem , still question the grouping of Sinitic as a separate sister branch to Tibeto-Burman, along with many particulars.

Tibeto-Burman, with well over languages, is especially problematic because of the inaccessibility of many languages in the Himalayas, not to mention that van Driem , p.

Still, Ethnologue offers a full family tree. Sino-Tibetan was at one time thought to include languages farther south, such as the Tai-Kadai languages and the Hmong-Mien Miao-Yao languages, but the similarities among these languages are probably better attributed to areal diffusion, including massive lexical borrowing from Chinese. Each of the Chinese languages of course has dialects.

Other sources divide the dialects differently, due not only to differences of linguistic and geographical criteria but also to centuries of diffusion of linguistic features. For discussion, see Kurpaska and Yan Linguistic diffusion is the general pattern in the historical development of Chinese, due to over a dozen massive population movements going back to the 7th century bce and continuing to the present, each migration involving hundreds of thousands and often millions of people.

Complicating these scenarios is the fact that in most cases, the migrations were to areas already settled by speakers of Chinese or other languages, often resulting in language mixture. The history of these migrations and their linguistic effects is traced by LaPolla As a group, they have many linguistic traits in common, including SOV order and agglutinative verb structure.

Karen and Bai both stand out enough from the rest of Tibeto-Burman to inspire attempts to classify them outside of Tibeto-Burman proper. See Wang for a brief survey with references.

The Munda branch is found in northeastern India, surrounded by Indo-European and Dravidian languages that have influenced its languages greatly over the ages. Typologically they are agglutinative, with SOV word order, making them typologically very different from the rest of the family. Austro-Asiatic includes two important national languages, Vietnamese and Khmer Cambodian. These two languages were grouped, along with many others, into a branch called Mon-Khmer, a grouping still accepted by Ethnologue but challenged by Sidwell Vietnamese has borrowed massively from Chinese and was originally written with Chinese characters.

Vietnamese and a few others in this family have developed phonological tones, and still others are thought to be in the process of developing them.

Both families share a number of typological traits: most of their languages are SVO with isolating morphology and contrastive tone that is associated with creaky or breathy voice quality. The remaining languages of Uralic are smaller ones found in northern parts of Europe and Asia. This relatively small region may have up to around 40 highly diverse languages, falling into three families, Nakho-Dagestanian, Abkhazo-Adyghean, and Kartvelian. The most important Nakho-Dagestanian language is Chechen.

Abkhaz-Adyghean is made up of Abkhaz and Adyghe and is best known among linguists for systems with 60 or more contrasting consonants but very few vowels. The major Kartvelian language is Georgian, with four million speakers. Its history in this location is widely thought to go back several millennia, antedating the more recent Indo-European migrations to the region.

There have attempts to identify Basque with a wide variety of groups, including Kartvelian, Afro-Asiatic, and Iberian, but without attracting much support. The current count exceeds 2, languages, grouped into just a few families. Many other questions still remain open. For example, Greenberg recognized Khoisan as a family, but later scholars have tended to set a higher bar for establishing genetic relationships, leading most to reject it as a family and to defer judgment on particular groupings into branches.

The unity of Nilo-Saharan is also called into question, and despite detailed comparative work by Bender — and Ehret , some reject Nilo-Saharan as a valid genetic unit.

Usama Soltan's Homepage -

For Niger-Congo, the status of some member branches—Kordofanian, Mande, Dogon, and Ijoid—has been challenged, though Niger-Congo itself is widely recognized as a valid family.

The Afro-Asiatic family is well established, though there are debates about subgrouping. For example, do Semitic, Berber, and Cushitic together form a separate branch, as Bender — contends? Within Niger-Congo, there are a number of unanswered questions, many revolving around the constituency of its most complex branch, Benue-Congo, which uncontroversially includes all the Bantu languages and many more. For details and references, see Bendor-Samuel and Hartell and the references in Nordhoff et al.

The Semitic branch has 78 languages, including Arabic, the first language of up to million throughout North Africa and widely spoken in the Middle East.

Other important Semitic languages are Hebrew, which shares official status in Israel with Arabic, and several Ethiopic languages. Amharic, the official language of Ethiopia and the first language of 21 million, is a South Ethiopic language. In the North Ethiopic branch is Tigrigna, an official language of Eritrea spoken by 7 million.

The term Afro-Asiatic was used by Joseph Greenberg to replace the designation Hamito-Semitic, which posited a division between the Semitic branch named for Biblical figure Shem and a putative branch named for Biblical figure Ham.

Greenberg argued that extraneous factors like these had no place in language classification, which should be based solely on linguistic data. Comparing languages from the different groups classed as Hamitic, Greenberg concluded that the evidence did not support their grouping into a single branch.

The Berber branch of Afro-Asiatic is spoken in the foothills of the Atlas Mountain in Morocco and Algeria and, spottily, in neighboring countries. Cushitic gets its name from Cush, the son of Ham. The several dozen languages of this group are spoken mainly in Ethiopia and Somalia, with a few in Kenya and Tanzania.

Chadic languages are mainly spoken in the countries surrounding Lake Chad and are dominant in northern Nigeria, numbering close to in all. By far the most widely spoken is Hausa, with 25 million native speakers. The languages of the Omotic branch, numbering over two dozen, are all spoken in southwestern Ethiopia. The Egyptian branch, thanks to hieroglyphs, can be traced back before 3, bce.

Islamic Studies

Ancient Egyptian was the ancestor of Coptic, spoken in Egypt, but over time was replaced by Arabic until Coptic died out, roughly years ago.

Since then Coptic has survived as a liturgical language. For a relatively small family, they are quite diverse typologically, leaving some doubt as to whether the Nilotic and Saharan branches really deserve to be grouped into a family.

Reflecting this, Glottolog divides them into two separate families, Nilotic and Saharan. Ideas about the respective genetic affiliations of well-known groups within Niger-Congo have changed substantially over the last half-century. This discovery—which took ten years before gaining the wide acceptance it has today—not only challenged earlier assumptions about linguistic classification but also opened the door to hypotheses about Bantu origins. The currently accepted view is that Bantu originated in southeastern Nigeria and expanded east and south from there.

This is the case with Khoisan, which is generally not recognized as an established family but as a set of 27 languages—some with just a handful of speakers—that are likely not to belong to the other three established families of African languages. Ermisch presents what is known, along with the residual problems. For more on Malayo-Polynesian, see the subsection on Austronesian in the section on Oceania.

The downside is that the contact situation has made it difficult to classify genetic relationships with certainty in some important cases. This section describes the Indo-European languages of Asia. The Tocharian branch became extinct with the expansion of Turkic Uyghur tribes in the 9th century ce.

Tocharian manuscripts from a few centuries prior to extinction, uncovered in the early 20th century, provided information that led scholars to reassess key assumptions about Proto-Indo-European and its descendants. Anatolian inscriptions from a much earlier era, about two millennia prior, similarly reshaped what had been known. Gamkrelidze and Ivanov offer a highly readable synthesis and summary of research presented in Gamkrelidze and Ivanov Among the over two hundred Indo-Aryan languages, Hindi and Urdu are official languages of India and Pakistan, respectively, and many consider them dialects of a single language.

Hindustani is the language once promoted by Gandhi and the Indian National Congress as a tool of national unity. For the Hindustani controversy, see Kachru The largest language of the Iranian component of Indo-Iranian is Persian, with estimates exceeding 50 million native speakers in Iran.

Written records of Old Persian go back to the 6th century bce. Other important languages in the Iranian branch are Pashto, mainly spoken in Afghanistan and Pakistan, and Kurdish, mainly spoken in Turkey, Iraq, and Iran. Despite the vastness of this area, the languages themselves are typologically quite similar: agglutinative, with vowel harmony involving both backness and rounding.

Mongolian, with over six million speakers, is by far the largest language in the family and the official language both of Mongolia and of the Inner Mongolian Autonomous Region of China. That includes Manchu, the language of the founders of the Qing Dynasty, which ruled China for nearly three centuries up to The edition of Ethnologue lists only 20 speakers for Manchu, though over ten million are ethnically Manchu.

Altaic has been regarded by some as a family comprising Turkic, Mongolic, and Tungusic, and for a few even including as distant members Japonic and Korean. Versions of the Altaic hypothesis still have adherents, even though this notion has been cast into doubt as criteria have been challenged and evidence has been rejected as based largely on shared typological similarities, a position summarized in Unger Despite this, adherents continue to make a case, among them Miller , Georg et al.

The more conservative consensus is that many resemblances among languages in this linguistic area could have come from language contact rather than a shared ancestor.

This view is reflected in Ethnologue and Glottolog, among others. The major literary languages are Tamil, Malayalam, Kannada, and Telugu, each one the first language of tens of millions.

More is known about the history of Dravidian than about many other language families, thanks to the long literary periods of the four major languages. Questions have been raised about Dravidian similarities to Uralic and Altaic, among several others. Austerlitz dismissed these, and Krishnamurti , briefly surveying archeological and DNA literature along with linguistic evidence in his foundational work on Dravidian, seconds the conclusion that the linguistic arguments behind the proposed genetic relationships are tenuous and speculative.

Dravidian morphology is mainly agglutinative but lacks the long strings of affixes found in other agglutinative languages. The typical word order is SOV. Sanskrit, an Indo-Aryan language, owes its retroflex consonants to Dravidian, from which they are thought to have spread by diffusion.

The division into Chinese and Tibeto-Burman branches is customary, as espoused by Matisoff , though a few experts, including van Driem , still question the grouping of Sinitic as a separate sister branch to Tibeto-Burman, along with many particulars.

Tibeto-Burman, with well over languages, is especially problematic because of the inaccessibility of many languages in the Himalayas, not to mention that van Driem , p. Still, Ethnologue offers a full family tree. Sino-Tibetan was at one time thought to include languages farther south, such as the Tai-Kadai languages and the Hmong-Mien Miao-Yao languages, but the similarities among these languages are probably better attributed to areal diffusion, including massive lexical borrowing from Chinese.

Each of the Chinese languages of course has dialects. Other sources divide the dialects differently, due not only to differences of linguistic and geographical criteria but also to centuries of diffusion of linguistic features.

Languages of the World

For discussion, see Kurpaska and Yan Linguistic diffusion is the general pattern in the historical development of Chinese, due to over a dozen massive population movements going back to the 7th century bce and continuing to the present, each migration involving hundreds of thousands and often millions of people. Complicating these scenarios is the fact that in most cases, the migrations were to areas already settled by speakers of Chinese or other languages, often resulting in language mixture.

The history of these migrations and their linguistic effects is traced by LaPolla As a group, they have many linguistic traits in common, including SOV order and agglutinative verb structure. Karen and Bai both stand out enough from the rest of Tibeto-Burman to inspire attempts to classify them outside of Tibeto-Burman proper.

See Wang for a brief survey with references. The Munda branch is found in northeastern India, surrounded by Indo-European and Dravidian languages that have influenced its languages greatly over the ages.

Typologically they are agglutinative, with SOV word order, making them typologically very different from the rest of the family. Austro-Asiatic includes two important national languages, Vietnamese and Khmer Cambodian. These two languages were grouped, along with many others, into a branch called Mon-Khmer, a grouping still accepted by Ethnologue but challenged by Sidwell Vietnamese has borrowed massively from Chinese and was originally written with Chinese characters.

Vietnamese and a few others in this family have developed phonological tones, and still others are thought to be in the process of developing them. Both families share a number of typological traits: most of their languages are SVO with isolating morphology and contrastive tone that is associated with creaky or breathy voice quality.

One of these is Ket, unrelated to any extant language and reduced to about speakers, but once a member of the Yeniseian family and unlike the rest of Paleosiberian in several respects. It is tonal and has a highly agglutinative verbal system with complex agreement patterns—features that make it look like Na-Dene in North America.

The case for a genetic relationship between the two has been made by Vajda , For arguments pro and con, see Kari and Potter , Campbell , and Kiparsky , pp. Implications of this finding for Beringian migrations are pursued by Sicoli and Holton

Similar files:


Copyright © 2019 ruthenpress.info.
DMCA |Contact Us