5,464
edits
Nankôre: Difference between revisions
→Introduction
m (→Background) |
|||
| Line 44: | Line 44: | ||
For a little over a century the origins of the language and its people remain clouded in mystery. Physically, the Nanhoshka people look distinct from the Northwest Pacific Native Americans just 862 kilometers from the eastern shore, but their physical features bear a strikingly close resemblance to the [[Minhast]] people of the Republic of Minhay, who live much further away on the other side of the Pacific Ocean close to Japan and Ainushir. Because of these physical resemblances, both anthropologists and linguists started exploring a possible relationship between the two peoples. Recent genetic research uncovered that both the Nanhoshka and Minhast belong to the haplogroup C-M212, indicating a common ancestry. Linguists had a more difficult task in establishing a relationship. Finally Benson et. al. compiled an extensive Swadesh list and internally consistent sound correspondences between the two languages. Most importantly, a set of affixes that were quite conservative were revealed, notably the Causative affix, and a set of fossilized affixes which are prefixed to body parts to derive verbs. In addition, a third language, [[Nahónda]], also previously classified as a language isolate, was discovered to contain common vocabulary and affixes which it shared with both Nankôre and Minhast. Therefore, both Nankôre and Minhast, along with Nahónda, are now recognized as belonging to the same language family, which has been named the Nahenic language family. | For a little over a century the origins of the language and its people remain clouded in mystery. Physically, the Nanhoshka people look distinct from the Northwest Pacific Native Americans just 862 kilometers from the eastern shore, but their physical features bear a strikingly close resemblance to the [[Minhast]] people of the Republic of Minhay, who live much further away on the other side of the Pacific Ocean close to Japan and Ainushir. Because of these physical resemblances, both anthropologists and linguists started exploring a possible relationship between the two peoples. Recent genetic research uncovered that both the Nanhoshka and Minhast belong to the haplogroup C-M212, indicating a common ancestry. Linguists had a more difficult task in establishing a relationship. Finally Benson et. al. compiled an extensive Swadesh list and internally consistent sound correspondences between the two languages. Most importantly, a set of affixes that were quite conservative were revealed, notably the Causative affix, and a set of fossilized affixes which are prefixed to body parts to derive verbs. In addition, a third language, [[Nahónda]], also previously classified as a language isolate, was discovered to contain common vocabulary and affixes which it shared with both Nankôre and Minhast. Therefore, both Nankôre and Minhast, along with Nahónda, are now recognized as belonging to the same language family, which has been named the Nahenic language family. | ||
Like Minhast and Nahónda, Nankôre is an SOV language. However, unlike its relatives, Nankôre is not a polysynthetic language but is relatively isolating. Nouns do not receive case or number marking, nor are they marked for gender. Word order within the verb complex is rather strict, but core, patient, and obliques may occur in various orders. The verb complex consists minimally of a main verb, which possesses suffixes for marking evidentiality, and the copula, which contain a rich set of affixes to mark the core arguments for various syntactic features: number, tense, voice, agency, etc. | |||
The language is neither an Ergative-Absolutive language, like Minhast, nor is it a Active-Stative language of the Fluid-S type, like Nahónda. Instead, its morphosyntactic alignment falls under the Direct-Inverse type. The nominal hierarchy is complex; at least ten noun classes based on animacy can be identified, and within those classes sub-hierarchies are observed based on semantic features, although discourse processes (e.g. the introduction of new arguments that are roughly equal in animacy with previously established arguments) may affect how direct-inverse marking is expressed. | |||
==Phonology== | ==Phonology== | ||